I am a completely normal guy, at least I felt like I was a week ago prior to being diagnosed with ADD. For me it was a bit of a relief, at least I had a reason as to why my spelling is so bad, why I get lost in my home town, why I lose things and why I make impulsive buying decisions, never completely irresponsible, just compulsive. The aspect of my ADD that results in constant excitement seeking, led me to risk all of my 401K money and start a technology company. I sold this company to a much larger company about a year ago and became a millionaire! I really thought my life was going to be nothing but bliss from that point forward. As part of the sale agreement, I will be working for the acquiring company for at least 4 years. My job function, went from a position of multiple tasks and lots of people to delegate to, to a very focused job and my multi-tasking pattern of work just doesn’t make sense in this position. I started to feel down, that I couldn’t “motivate” myself into getting any work done. Everyday, I have to bribe myself to get myself to do the smallest of tasks, usually with Coffee or food.
<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p> </o:p>
While having a beer with a co-worker, I interrupted him a few times and made comments on multiple topics, in the same breath. He jokingly said “how’s your ADD worken out for ya?” I laughed because I’ve heard this joke from several people in my career, then in suddenly hit me, what if I REALLY do have ADD? I quickly fired off multiple text messages to friends and family asking them if they thought I had ADD, many said “of coarse” others said “probably” I WAS SHOCKED!!!!! A week later and my doctor confirmed it, next week I will start Aderall. I still can’t quite get used to the idea, but, I am really excited about potentially being able to change my brain in a positive way at will, with medication. Don’t you feel like this sort of makes us more mentally capable than the rest of the boring population? Now we can be “linear thinkers” like they are, during the week and we can be risk takers, see the big picture and stay tuned-in to people on the weekends.
<o:p> </o:p>
I wonder if conversation between two ADD people would be more interesting than conversations with “linear thinkers”. I personally can not stand “normal” people who repeat themselves 2,3 4 even 5 times. For example, one person in a two person conversation might say all of this “it sure is nice outside”…..”yup its one of those nice days”….”don’t have these all the time do we?” and they think we’re the weird ones. Drives me nuts.

Ooooooh no. That linear thinking lark is for the birds and I want no part of it.

all true -

the interesting part is then to take your observations and to see how come such great qualities could lead to us often feeling quite 'bad'.

'boredom' 's a killer -
- people just haven't realised it yet.

When the older generation pick up on how they're inadvertently strangling their own kids through not providing sufficiently stimulating activities
- maybe there'll be change ?

planetdave Re: They "linear thnkers" are the wierd ones, not us
<hr style="color: rgb(209, 209, 225); background-color: rgb(209, 209, 225);" size="1"> Ooooooh no. That linear thinking lark is for the birds and I want no part of it.

Planetdave - Please explain more, I am interested in what you are saying here.

Thanks,

One thing of interest is that those with ADHD don't have the best self perception...in fact you will find that true of a number of disorders. Your "gift" may be annoying to others. Taken to an extreme we have the Autism movement calling everyone else Neurotypicals and believing that they have some special powers and identifying with x-men. In reality it is a disorder and few attributes believed to be associated with the disorder actually can be proven to be true attributes. In a nutshell when you talk to someone who is all over the map and can't keep focus on the topic, it is at best amusing.

you must have great friends who focus on your actions.

my best friend didn't believe i even had it, because i wasn't "hyper". "it's just anxiety problems!" lol

good for you. and heck yeah for being rich due to ADD! buy stuff that i can't, so one of us can enjoy it.

<O:p></O:p>
I wonder if conversation between two ADD people would be more interesting than conversations with “linear thinkers”. I personally can not stand “normal” people who repeat themselves 2,3 4 even 5 times. For example, one person in a two person conversation might say all of this “it sure is nice outside”…..”yup its one of those nice days”….”don’t have these all the time do we?” and they think we’re the weird ones. Drives me nuts.

Yes, well, smalltalk is an acquired art for us. It requires constant attention on the part of an ADD'er, and you know how hard that gets. It is also difficult to wait patiently for someone to finish his sentence if you already know what they are going to say. Even more so if you already know you will not even be interested in what they are going to say int the first place:p

In many NT setting I am not known as a brilliant conversationalist. I tend to just daydream away, or look at the trucks or the birds passing the window. Often I have a hard time coming up with a suitably interesting NT compatible topic.

As for conversations with "our kind of people":
In one of my other posts I have wondered just how many ADD people there are. I think there are a lot of at least 'pseudo' ADD ers out there.

I have that idea because I do find there are some types of people I can have very interesting conversations with, and that's usually not about the weather. Often those people are creative types(designers, guitarists), but that does not seem to be universally true.

One thing of interest is that those with ADHD don't have the best self perception...in fact you will find that true of a number of disorders. Your "gift" may be annoying to others. Taken to an extreme we have the Autism movement calling everyone else Neurotypicals and believing that they have some special powers and identifying with x-men. In reality it is a disorder and few attributes believed to be associated with the disorder actually can be proven to be true attributes. In a nutshell when you talk to someone who is all over the map and can't keep focus on the topic, it is at best amusing.

Obviously the OP has done really well for himself. He took a huge risk and made it work. Most people would call that a success and would call his innate ability a gift.

Whether or not he annoys anyone is inconsequential. Every person is annoying to someone else out there and every single person, ADHD or not, has annoying habits. Many talented and obviously gifted people annoy a whole lot of people. Think Eminem. Being gifted does not equal being "good". Being an annoyance does not equal being disordered.

And I'm failing to understand why it's extreme to call those with "normal" brains NT. "Neuro" refers to the brain. "Typical" refers to a representative specimen. In other words, NT, refers to a person possessing a brain representative of the population. While I'm not advocating an "us vs. them" mentality, there are big differences. We must have some way of differentiating.

I do feel the "super powers and x-men" comment was uncalled for. Until recently, I thought everyone was just like me in knowing what people around me are feeling. If I care about a person who's experiencing negative emotions, I can feel what they're feeling so powerfully that I have to either leave the house, hang up the phone, or cheer them up real quick. Super powers? No! It's a drag since I feel responsible for the emotional state of everyone around me. However, it is a gift. Not necessarily to me, but to my family, friends, and coworkers. They unload everything on me. But see? Because we're dealing with the brain here, there's almost no way to differentiate between these feelings and me. And in the same light, there's no way to differentiate between my ADD and me. I am ADD and what I mentioned above is simply part of my ADD self.

As far as attributes go, there are both good and bad attributes. Attributes are merely characteristics of a person or thing. Right now, ADHD is often diagnosed when you possess, say, 7 out of 10 bad attributes, such as being unable to finish what you start. However, ADHD could almost just as easily be diagnosed when you possess 7 out of 10 good attributes. Pretty much no one diagnosed will have the same "bad" attributes just like they won't have the same "good" attributes. However, there are many "good" attributes that have a much higher representation in the ADD population than in the population at large.

The problem is, to prescribe drugs, it must be a disorder. If it's a disorder, it must have a negative impact on your life.

To me, ADHD is being completely unable to do what many people expect, and unable to do what most people can do easily, while being able to do things most people can't do and couldn't imagine doing.

If there were positive attributes scientifically associated with ADHD they would be in the DSM4. There are no differences between us and the general population that can be demonstrated except for some behaviours which fall two standard deviations from the norm. I am aware of my behaviours and make adjustments for them...and thats about it. I don't wrap this up in a us vrs them package and put a bow on it. This is an opinion, feel free to believe otherwise.

The way I see it ADD makes it hard to keep you mind on track. Hence, attention deficiency.
I would say the gist of what is being said in this thread is that while we have problems focusing our attention on only one thing at at time, could it not be so that a NT has just as much trouble spreading his/her attention span over more than one thing. If that should be the case, I do see a distinct advantage here.

That is why some have suggested using the term Difference instead of Deficiency.
The problems I have with the world I am forced to live in are not so much with myself(as I have mistakenly thought for all those years) as much as with the fact that in a democracy the majority vote counts. The majority is NT, so their view of the world is prevalent. I am forced to live by their rules and adapt to their systems of thinking.

Compare this to the differences between a train and a car. Both have their advantages and disadvantages. But it will be a little difficult to make a train run on a highway and vice versa. You could mount rails under a car, but it will never become a train.

The way I see it ADD makes it hard to keep you mind on track. Hence, attention deficiency.
I would say the gist of what is being said in this thread is that while we have problems focusing our attention on only one thing at at time, could it not be so that a NT has just as much trouble spreading his/her attention span over more than one thing. If that should be the case, I do see a distinct advantage here.


You have built up your world view and approach to life on the assumption that ADHDers have a gift to see globally, when compared to the general population. What if other people can also see globally yet when it gets down to details can focus on sequential bits of information? What if our global abilities do not vary significantly from the general population? Show me the study that clearly indicates that ADHDers have an attribute that positively impacts their live. I propose to you that there is no such attribute and there is a whole commercial industry and other vested interests that feed those with ADHD and other disorders, "little white lies". Lets call it the "self esteem cognitive complex"...or SECC. :)

Show me the study that clearly indicates that ADHDers have an attribute that positively impacts their live.



drug companies fund studies to prove that their drugs work against disease (regardless)
governments fund studies into disease to prove that their policy versus disease is working(regardless)
charities connected to specific diseases fund studies into their associated diseases

- Your point is important -
because (and yet again) - we see a flaw in the systems we are forced to adhere to

scientists need a disease in order to gain funding -
[- it's called lying]

if you have any friends inside a University - try and probe the science departments to find out how many have placed disease states down on their grant proposals -
- not because of the likelihood in helping those diseased states -
- instead because it's just one of those boxes which the scientist need tick, in order to gain funding to perform their own research.

In actual fact
- we should be looking at issues from the exact other way -
- don't study unhappy people and work out how to make them happy

- study happy people and work our how they're different from those of us who are unhappy

- the conclusions would be interesting -
I'd love to help design an experiment of that sort -

but I know the likely ourcome -
- it'll be related to intelligence (a function of 'proper' education)

happiness will run a parallel with intelligence and the individual's physical and mental 'freedom'

--- anyhow ---
until there's a sea change
- nobody'll be able to provide you with definitive data of the sort you request -

- it's just not possible to gain funding to study that kinda' question;
currently, you'll be trumped by any who put down any disorder of the Western world -

- from a previous thread of ours -

Funding defined by



1.Number of {rich,Western,affluent} individuals affected -> the pharmaceutical company needs and wants to make a profit (above all)
2. Children affected -> the pharmaceutical company knows that parents will re-mortgage their houses, sell all their belongings to fund a ridiculously expensive and entirely speculative medication -> ooo! more profits for the pharmaceutical company
3. Effects of disease on lifespan and quality of life -> the pharmaceutical company makes more money if the disease persists for life. Cures are not sought.

- So -
which areas are best funded by pharmaceutical companies ?

1. Western diseases
2. Child-onset
3. Chronic, lifelong conditions,not life-threatening.

feel the ca$h being lifted from your pockets <- capitali$m does that

Pharmaceutical companies will want all conditions fulfilling the ADHD spectrum of 1. 2. and 3. to be made out to be as debilitating as possible -
for one reason and one reason alone

Addressed to SB_UK

Is ADHD a problem though - ? -
of course it is

Addressed to SB_UK

So what are you saying then - ? -
I'm not saying anything, thankyou very much -
- I'm suggesting that we're very careful when we interprete profiles of advertising, patterns in funding, patterns in profiles in disease studies which are funded

- because all of these're capable of being tainted by any with motivation so to do

Addressed to SB_UK

And what's the motive of those who so do - ? -

money $
- you idiot !

it's always money.

It's only ever money.

I do have some researcher friends. If they could clearly show that ADHDers have gifts they would instantly become recognized across the globe, increase the prestige of the university, and drastically increase their take home pay. Did anyone mention tenure? Even within the disease model, they could study attributes with a supposed negative attribute and "discover" a positive attribute instead. I'm just not buying what your selling. That would be a conspiracy theory of the first order. All of science, every government, and business...across the globe, purposely blocking the TRUTH from those hapless ADHDers. Respectfully, I totally disagree with your belief system SB, the best to you!

belief system

- that's incorrect -
my hypotheses are amenable to the experimental method

- just that your belief system (if you continue to support trickle down your pants economics)

prevents proper science from taking place by introducing bias.

Consider the tables turned.

Apologies if I remember the nature of your childish attachment to that particularly poor form of wealth equalization incorrectly.

Incidentally - congratulations on improving your standard of written English -

Noel Coward next stop,
eh ?


:-)

SB_UK just said exactly what I was trying to say. There is absolutely no reason positive attributes would ever make it into the DSM4. Nobody is blocking the truth. No one knows the truth. There is no conspiracy.

What we do have is the drug companies, the FDA here in the US, and the psychiatrists. The drug companies want to sell their drug (which helps immensely -- don't get me wrong). Do you know how difficult it is to get a drug OKed by the FDA? My dad who's worked in the industry for 30 years could tell you. There has to be very real, very definitive problems that are lessened by treatment. In the same way you would never find anything positive on a diagnostic sheet for a disease or condition there will never be any positive diagnostic criteria for ADD. Whoever heard of the positive side of heart disease or the good side to cancer?

It's really simple economics and has nothing to do with conspiracies.

And, since the DSM4 is relatively new and took years to come up with, isn't it safe to say that as scientists are discovering positives, it'll take just as long to come up with the criteria?

As for the second post, it's not entirely true. Some of us can function very well in certain environments and under certain conditions and not at all in others. Is knowing this about oneself equal to assuming that we have a gift? Far from it.

...and "discover" a positive attribute instead.


Imagine if one were to publish something positive about ADHD.

Lots of press coverage.

An interview -

ADDers everywhere love you

- but then you apply for a grant and attend an interview

'but Doctor Schmoctor'
- we all saw you on TV stating that ADHD 'totally like rocked dude'
- and so sadly the funding board has re-allocated your funding to Professor Schlofessor for his grant
entitled :
The effects of eating too much, smoking and not exercising on bad stuff in oldish people :
A possible connection ?
'Thankyou and goodnight !'

- and then before you know it, all of your friends (from previously) also have their grants rejected because of Doctor Schmoctor's proclor mation.

No money, house, wife and children.
No friends, place to work, reputation
- even your multiple degrees have been rescinded

... ... and why ?

- all because somebody with a moon for an avatar wouldn't open his eyes and look for himself -

- contextual disorder -
we're disordered as a reaction to those wearing $ponsored blinkers -

- and so the general point is -

why not just look over all of the polls over the lifetime of the forum on
'keep or lose your ADHD tomorrow
- what you gonna' do?' ?

You'll note that there's always at least a 50:50 split
- which is remarkable for a disease,
suggesting that it's more than a disease

- though that (of course) disorder is a part -

- and so the question becomes
how ?

we've covered all of this before though, no ???

It will be very interesting for me to read all of this, and re-evaluate my own thinking, after taking the medication, for the first time, on Tuesday. Maybe the change will be dramatic leaving me to conclude that untreated ADD is not a gift, or maybe my ability to see the big picture or be able to understand others will diminish. I am open to the idea that my brain is not normal and maybe in a sense less that normal, but I am also open to the very real fact that I get to pick which state to be in every morning where as NT's don't. In that way, I suppose there is proof in looking at how many people with ADD choose not to take meds everyday. There must be a reason or advatage (at least in their minds) at times to ADD or they would always take them, right?

Funny, a co-worker just came in and asked that I look at a problem, he wanted me to take a look prior to meds next week, he wanted to hear non-standard solutions.

at any rate, I dont have to put a neat little bow on this thing, if the facts lead me away from that, I can accept it.

It will be very interesting for me to read all of this, and re-evaluate my own thinking, after taking the medication, for the first time, on Tuesday. Maybe the change will be dramatic leaving me to conclude that untreated ADD is not a gift, or maybe my ability to see the big picture or be able to understand others will diminish. I am open to the idea that my brain is not normal and maybe in a sense less that normal, but I am also open to the very real fact that I get to pick which state to be in every morning where as NT's don't. In that way, I suppose there is proof in looking at how many people with ADD choose not to take meds everyday. There must be a reason or advatage (at least in their minds) at times to ADD or they would always take them, right?

Funny, a co-worker just came in and asked that I look at a problem, he wanted me to take a look prior to meds next week, he wanted to hear non-standard solutions.

at any rate, I dont have to put a neat little bow on this thing, if the facts lead me away from that, I can accept it.
I was afraid that meds would take away my business creativity. Nothing could have been farther from the truth for me. Instead of taking it away, especially for the first few days it helped focus it. I wrote down pages and pages of new ideas while on a flight for the first time in a long time.

Now though, creativity is still there and a little easier to access. Before it was just so sporadic and unexpected that I never knew when it would come or where from. Seems I can control it slightly better now.

SB_UK just said exactly what I was trying to say. There is absolutely no reason positive attributes would ever make it into the DSM4. Nobody is blocking the truth. No one knows the truth. There is no conspiracy.

What we do have is the drug companies, the FDA here in the US, and the psychiatrists. The drug companies want to sell their drug (which helps immensely -- don't get me wrong). Do you know how difficult it is to get a drug OKed by the FDA? My dad who's worked in the industry for 30 years could tell you. There has to be very real, very definitive problems that are lessened by treatment. In the same way you would never find anything positive on a diagnostic sheet for a disease or condition there will never be any positive diagnostic criteria for ADD. Whoever heard of the positive side of heart disease or the good side to cancer?

It's really simple economics and has nothing to do with conspiracies.

And, since the DSM4 is relatively new and took years to come up with, isn't it safe to say that as scientists are discovering positives, it'll take just as long to come up with the criteria?

As for the second post, it's not entirely true. Some of us can function very well in certain environments and under certain conditions and not at all in others. Is knowing this about oneself equal to assuming that we have a gift? Far from it.

At the time...15 years or more ago...when they were trying to be as scientific as possible because there were a lot of naysayers, any attribute with a very high predictive power would have been jumped upon. They would have held parades with large signs...for those who don't know the history of the disorder, establishing the validity of the disorder was...and still is to some degree a real battle.

The self help industry would jump all over any positive attribute and made millions, even billions of dollars from a positive attribute. It would be a whole field to exploit and Dr.'s and teachers would drum up business for good practitioners. Schools would be created...colleges even, focusing on this attribute. Remember 5-10% of the population has ADHD...think of the market. As a parent you could do something scientifically proven to be beneficial for your child without meds.

But those who disagree cling to the belief that this information has been suppressed because of big pharma, the government, science.... I'm not buying that line of thinking at all.

The self help industry would jump all over any positive attribute and made millions, even billions of dollars from a positive attribute. It would be a whole field to exploit and Dr.'s and teachers would drum up business for good practitioners. Schools would be created...colleges even, focusing on this attribute. Remember 5-10% of the population has ADHD...think of the market. As a parent you could do something scientifically proven to be beneficial for your child without meds.



Ned Hallowell
Kenny Handelman
Garret LoPorto
Cathy Corman
Sari Solden
Xenia Madison (on a local level)
http://www.beaconcollege.edu/


But those who disagree cling to the belief that this information has been suppressed because of big pharma, the government, science...

Those who disagree do NOT cling to the belief that this information has been suppressed. You haven't been reading what we're saying. We're saying conclusive scientific evidence does not exist for a reason -- that reason being economics -- money.

Scientific studies cost a WHOLE lot of money. Are you going to throw away millions on something that can't be patented? Is any organization? It would be stupid from a business standpoint.

Instead, we have people -- a few of whom I mentioned above -- that noticed positive trends and are capitalizing on them while helping a whole lot of people.

Until some ADHD billionaire dies, leaving his estate to the research of positive attributes of ADHDers, likely there never will be this scientific evidence you're talking about.

We're saying conclusive scientific evidence does not exist for a reason -- that reason being economics -- money.

exactly -
- that's all there is to it -


in-built bias in research towards IP.

* drug companies fund studies to prove that their drugs work against disease (regardless)
* governments fund studies into disease to prove that their policy versus disease is working(regardless)
* charities connected to specific diseases fund studies into their associated diseases

- Your point is important -
because (and yet again) - we see a flaw in the systems we are forced to adhere to

scientists need a disease in order to gain funding -
[- it's called lying]

Whose not really listening? Virtually all the pillars of society were mentioned as impediments to discovery. Furthermore, in the disease model of scientific study, I mentioned that positive attributes could be found while looking for negative attributes. ADHD is the most studied childhood disorder in existence. I'm sure the attributes that are assumed to be positive in ADHD have already been studied...creativity being one such attribute that has had several studies.

Has anyone considered that since it is a disorder one wouldn't expect to find cognitive skill sets significantly elevated in those with ADHD? Question your assumptions, it's a core tenant of science.

I really thought my life was going to be nothing but bliss from that point forward.

We always think that having money leads to long lasting happiness. But it doesn't. And you're just more proof of that.

Sadly this is the motivating factor for so many billions of people. I always see people driving nice cars (ferraris, porsche, etc etc) and I think "fools, arrogant fools". While they think, "im better and cooler. I'm rich!"

I am really excited about potentially being able to change my brain in a positive way at will, with medication. Don’t you feel like this sort of makes us more mentally capable than the rest of the boring population? Now we can be “linear thinkers” like they are, during the week and we can be risk takers, see the big picture and stay tuned-in to people on the weekends. <o></o>

When I was first given medication for ADHD, I remember having the same feeling of jubilation at the thought that I could, at last, be like the 'normal people'. Unfortunately that didn't happen. For me, it really just muffles the static in my head and gives me a little more control over choosing my current point of focus. I still have multiple trains of thought, I still make unusual connections between them, and I still don't even know what it's like to think in one straight line!

I think it's important to be realistic about what meds can do for you. They're not going to change who you are. The limitations of ADHD still exist. But they give you a framework for coping and adapting rather than just floundering through life. That's my experience, at least.

Whose not really listening? Virtually all the pillars of society were mentioned as impediments to discovery. Furthermore, in the disease model of scientific study,
I1 mentioned that positive attributes could be found while looking for negative attributes. ADHD is the most studied childhood disorder in existence.
I2'm sure the attributes that are assumed to be positive in ADHD have already been studied...creativity being one such attribute that has had several studies.
Has anyone considered that since it is a disorder one wouldn't expect to find cognitive skill sets significantly elevated in those with ADHD?
Question your assumptions, it's a core tenant of science.


I don't understand
- we've covered I1 above in this thread,

and covered I2 with Barbyma

and don't understand

"one wouldn't expect to find cognitive skill sets significantly elevated in those with ADHD?"

if you're mean they do (I have no idea what the term 'skill set' means)
- then you're in agreement
and
if you mean that they don't
- then you'll also know from previously that we've described ADHD as taking longer to learn better
- and so you're also in agreement with diametrically opposed sense.

Note
to 'skill set'
sounds like a superset to the verbs within the container class
to 'executive function'

in which case we've covered all of these ideas in actually your thread.

- the disorder argument does not take the long haul argument into account - for instance -
place a cheek chappy under water and watch him suffer
- put one of aquatic progenitors under water and watch them survive

from an evolutionary point of view we're better (more complex)
- but we took a 'hit' in the process and now no longer can mimic a dolphin on heat doing a 360 through a hoop at MAC 6.

please click on the two (very top and bottom) links here -
my point in another context
~ADDF internal link (http://www.addforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=620829&postcount=25)~

- there's a problem - I know the solution -
actually we all know the solution -
reigning in $$$terror$$$ is the solution.

I went to a drug company a while back (talk on disease genetics) -

the chair of the meeting phrased the following question at the end

- he had been drinking (the talk was in a company club) -

"since we've the market-leading cure for this disease -
we should be looking for the disease trigger -
- make it and then sprinkle it into the environment

right ?
Our profits would soar."

He had been drinking (in his defence) -
- but doesn't drink simply 'loosen the tongue' (in his prosecution).

As someone with the problem which was being covered in that talk (not ADHD) - I took great offence
- and won't ever forget that comment.

He simply gave voice to what other pharmaceutical people think
- through having his inhibitions lowered and being unable to suppress himself -

--- anyway ---

http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:z18becx3vAmlWM:http://www.scribepublications.com.au/files/book/cover_image/196/TADC.jpg

~eg (http://journals.democraticunderground.com/T.Ruth2power/3)~ just the first google I happened upon with
s/t [the truth about pharmaceutical companies Angell]

Is the pharmaceutical industry a dangerous and crooked business that federal and state authorities need to bring to heel? Should those who develop, market or prescribe drugs hang their heads in shame when faced with the stark reality of what they do to earn a living? Is Big Pharma in fact the moral equivalent of the tobacco industry? One could well come away from Marcia Angell's The Truth about the Drug Companies or Jerome Kassirer's On the Take thinking so. In both books, the sort of moral opprobrium once directed against Big Tobacco is aimed squarely at the pharmaceutical industry, along with its legions of lobbyists, the politicians awash in its campaign contributions and the doctors it has bought, free meal by free meal, junket by junket, free sample by free sample and trinket by trinket.

We always think that having money leads to long lasting happiness. But it doesn't. And you're just more proof of that.

Sadly this is the motivating factor for so many billions of people. I always see people driving nice cars (ferraris, porsche, etc etc) and I think "fools, arrogant fools". While they think, "im better and cooler. I'm rich!"


Exactly

I'm tired of being forced to wear the t-shirt

I'm with $tupid

- only idiots chase money

why?

Because there's a tacit agreement that for every penny which you take
- another person does without -

those who're most effective at taking money are the richer individual$ -
those who're being stolen from are the poorer individuals and so the pattern is for

[poor->ill-educated] --->$--->--- [rich->stupid people]
[causal connection] ..................... [causal connection]

The poor become ill-educated through poverty and then suffer because their minds aren't sufficient to gain stimulation within.
The rich become stupid because one need break one's own logical integrity to ignore the inevitable truth of one's own wealth being stolen.

Examples

Banks -> aggressive campaigns selling credit cards (and then debt in little people like us)
Banks -> aggressive campaigns selling mortgagaes (and then debt in little people like us)
Banks -> allowing our account to be overdrawn [instead of the obvious alternative] (and then charging us ridiculous amounts of money for an unplanned overdraft)

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

Sorry
- corrections to post #26

if [you're mean] [->you mean that] they do (I have no idea what the term 'skill set' means) place a [cheek] [->cheeky] chappy under water and watch him suffer- but we took a 'hit' in the process and now no longer can mimic a dolphin on heat doing a [360] [->360o] through a hoop at MAC 6.- put one [of] [->of our] aquatic progenitors under water and watch them survive

You have built up your world view and approach to life on the assumption that ADHDers have a gift to see globally, when compared to the general population. What if other people can also see globally yet when it gets down to details can focus on sequential bits of information? What if our global abilities do not vary significantly from the general population? Show me the study that clearly indicates that ADHDers have an attribute that positively impacts their live. I propose to you that there is no such attribute and there is a whole commercial industry and other vested interests that feed those with ADHD and other disorders, "little white lies". Lets call it the "self esteem cognitive complex"...or SECC. :)

Most of what you state here has already been answered in some of the other posts. I'll just add my own part.

Obviously there is no reason whatsoever for positive "symptoms" to end up in de DSM or anywhere else for that matter. These people deal in sickness only.

Please remember I did not say " ADHD positively impacts my life" As the rest of my post shows it leads to severe problems of adaptation to the "majority view"
There are in my view however redeeming qualities to ADHD.

What I am saying is that in my day to day life there are many situations in which I ask myself questions like:



why can't these people follow my train of thought?



OR: why can't they see the connection(thinking inside their very own handcrafted box)



OR why can't they see the obvious(thinking you already have the anwer).



OR why are they not interested in this/do they have no knowledge of this(many people have only 2 to 4 primary fields of interest, usually including :psoccer/football:p)



OR why do they always ask me, when they could just as easily find out for themselves. (I rarely ask, I just start trying an erroring.)



I hope this somewhat abstract list of examples is in any way comprehensible.

I know it is not a problem with my thought processes because every now and then I meet someone who can follow where I am going, allowing me to validate my conclusions.
I am very reluctant to put this down to mere IQ because I'm not so remarkable in that respect, actually quite average. And still I often find myself in conversations wondering "why can't you mentally go there/think those thoughts, and I can"

So for me there are indeed both advantages and disadvantages. It would be nice if they were better balanced though.

Who's done research into AD/HD minds? There have been a few PET scans done but otherwise it's still a bit more of a mystery than the NT mind.

Is my mind better than it would have been if it happened to be NT? What can be said is that it's different.

We are so used to people being described as 'differently able' these days that we tend not to notice that sometimes there are advantages. In the physical world we had Douglas Bader, who became a better fighter pilot because he had no lower legs (so more resistant to G), and today we have that footless athlete that can take sprinters to the cleaners with his prosthetic limbs. Crude examples perhaps but telling in that having less 'standard' performance in some ways can create a better result.

Those examples are very easy to quantify, sprinters are measured very precisely, but who measures a mind? I was mistakenly put in the gifted group in school (for math) because I had a talent for seeing a way round problems that my nerdy classmates (with super high NT intelligence) had to work out the long way. I was eventually found out and removed..I could never 'prove' my results and in this world that counts for more than sitting smugly in the back taking cheap shots at the glasses and spots brigade. This ultimately results in me not being able to pass exams because they just aren't geared for someone who can't 'explain' how they 'didn't cheat'. Obviously I'm not 'gifted' if I don't conform to how you measure a gifted program.

And that's how things are. I used to sit at work with my Aspergers supervisor and he'd smash a fiendish cryptic crossword into submission before I'd cracked the 'T break for losers' crossword. And I'm non too shoddy on a crossword.

So what do these anecdotes tell us? I can be a right smartpants if I'm given the right question (as could my supervisor) but we were blue collar workers who couldn't find a job/career to exploit our strengths. And that's how society judges you. I'm not 'planetdave the sparky lateral thinker' (coz that's the only thinking this mind can manage) I'm 'planetdave the blue collar worker with his low rent lifestyle'.

That good enough for ya'?

Yes, there are advantages to ADHD. The major factor in my mind would come from not being connected...outcast if you will. Helen Keller has written beautifully about this concept. I do believe that it is a lot easier to understand and have empathy for others in need if one has walked that path oneself.

Obviously there is no reason whatsoever for positive "symptoms" to end up in de DSM or anywhere else for that matter. These people deal in sickness only.

Check your assumptions at the door. Take some time to read about researchers and you can see they have devoted a life time to the study of ADHD. Some, offer advice based on what they know in the field. You may be surprised to learn that they have ADHDers best interests at heart and that they describe key characteristics succinctly. Why would they omit positive attributes? The only answer that I can come up with are conspiracy theories.

When we start to use language like Neurotypical we are mentally distancing ourselves from society. Above all, we as a species are a social animal. This is how we have become the dominant species on the planet. It has been clearly demonstrated that ADHDers statistically have difficulty fitting in. Why?...because we are different and "they" don't understand us? I would say that we are the same. We just act differently. You see this point demonstrated in a lot in social exchanges like conversations. There are unwritten social rules based on our need as a species to share. It has been by sharing that mankind has blossomed. If one "talks incessantly" (ADHD characteristic for some) one is not sharing, and to the other participant it looks like they are trying to dominate the conversation. Rather then putting the blame on the "NT" for whatever reason, lets instead look at what really happened.

Building up myths about ADHD, and then codifying them, unfortunately,...in my opinion, perpetuates the poor social connectivity that many with ADHD have. These little white lies take us away from others, and ourselves. ADHD is not about being unique, it's about not doing certain skill sets as well as others...end of story. Simply, in my life I find work arounds to bridge these deficiencies when I can, and move on. I'm not going to navel gaze and create a new language and belief system to explain the difficulties I am experiencing.

So what do these anecdotes tell us?

In a word, nothing...scientifically speaking. They are subjective stories and if we have had similar experiences we can relate to them. That would be about it. :)

Science explains

The simplest most explanatory model wins

In this case (ADD) - the simplest explanatory model will not be believed unless people are willing to make the effort -
- the irony of a simple model requiring more effort to comprehend than a series of dispersed complex arguments is interesting.

The basis to this argument resides in the nature of ADD being intertwined with the tool which we use to understand ADD.

Choose not to make the effort and it is impossible for another to convince you either ways -
- however -
it's laziness
- if one chooses this path - I'm not entirely sure that one can elect to offer advice or even be a part of a strong community

- just incomplete information is all.

Seemingly rude - but from 5 years on-line now, the only people who have proven their capacity to teach -
- have been those who understand both sides.

Otherwise fatal bias.

An honest opinion - if you feel as though I'm being rude - I'll try and remember where last I described this idea and post a link so that you can see consistency in argument.

There's no point in being rude to anybody -
- but there's every incentive in preventing others from influencing other others based on incomplete knowledge base.

The problem which we're discussing is the most immediate perspective (which is yours) - not being the simplest.
Tease apart the distinction between

simplest
and
most immediate model -

- and you'll see what I'm getting at.
Yes, there are advantages to ADHD. The major factor in my mind would come from not being connected...outcast if you will. Helen Keller has written beautifully about this concept. I do believe that it is a lot easier to understand and have empathy for others in need if one has walked that path oneself.



Check your assumptions at the door. Take some time to read about researchers and you can see they have devoted a life time to the study of ADHD. Some, offer advice based on what they know in the field. You may be surprised to learn that they have ADHDers best interests at heart and that they describe key characteristics succinctly. Why would they omit positive attributes? The only answer that I can come up with are conspiracy theories.

When we start to use language like Neurotypical we are mentally distancing ourselves from society. Above all, we as a species are a social animal. This is how we have become the dominant species on the planet. It has been clearly demonstrated that ADHDers statistically have difficulty fitting in. Why?...because we are different and "they" don't understand us? I would say that we are the same. We just act differently. You see this point demonstrated in a lot in social exchanges like conversations. There are unwritten social rules based on our need as a species to share. It has been by sharing that mankind has blossomed. If one "talks incessantly" (ADHD characteristic for some) one is not sharing, and to the other participant it looks like they are trying to dominate the conversation. Rather then putting the blame on the "NT" for whatever reason, lets instead look at what really happened.

Building up myths about ADHD, and then codifying them, unfortunately,...in my opinion, perpetuates the poor social connectivity that many with ADHD have. These little white lies take us away from others, and ourselves. ADHD is not about being unique, it's about not doing certain skill sets as well as others...end of story. Simply, in my life I find work arounds to bridge these deficiencies when I can, and move on. I'm not going to navel gaze and create a new language and belief system to explain the difficulties I am experiencing.

There's no way positive attributes can end up in the DSM4 because how can you treat a positive attribute? "You're creative? Well here are some meds to help you with that problem."

Building up myths about ADHD, and then codifying them, unfortunately,...in my opinion, perpetuates the poor social connectivity that many with ADHD have. These little white lies take us away from others, and ourselves. ADHD is not about being unique, it's about not doing certain skill sets as well as others...end of story.

You've never trained dogs or horses have you?

When we ask these animals to behave according to the standards of another species, there are two categories that nearly all the training methods fall under. One is punishment/fear based. The other may use negative reinforcement but is reward and trust based.

One leads to either fearful or aggressive animals. It leads to broken spirits, sulkiness, skulking, etc. It leads to acting out which often leads to the pound, or getting put down.

The other leads to happy, confident, trustworthy animals. These animals truly become part of the family and part of society. They are a benefit to society in general.

Check your assumptions at the door. Take some time to read about researchers and you can see they have devoted a life time to the study of ADHD. Some, offer advice based on what they know in the field. You may be surprised to learn that they have ADHDers best interests at heart and that they describe key characteristics succinctly. Why would they omit positive attributes? The only answer that I can come up with are conspiracy theories.

Again, you're pushing your world view, your model of how people work, on us. You're assuming that because we don't believe anything positive will make it to the DSM4, we mistrust the motives of the researchers. As far as conspiracy theories, we've covered that over and over again. :rolleyes:

When we start to use language like Neurotypical we are mentally distancing ourselves from society.

Perhaps this is the effect such language has on you personally. For me, it does quite the opposite. Understanding ADHD and use of words like NT gives me a reason to keep living. An utter failure in a predominantly NT world, I do have abilities that most people don't. These are not abilities that lead to amazing jobs. I can sing something that'll bring tears to people's eyes. I can cook a meal for ten people that tastes better than you can get in most restaurants in about a half hour. I can paint and draw. I can also feel what other people are feeling and I usually know how people will behave in any situation...

Words like NT enable me to believe, "there are many things that I can't do that you can do easily and there are some things that I can do that you can't"... With such a belief, I stand next to the NT person and take my place in society. I am worthy of living.

Simply, in my life I find work arounds to bridge these deficiencies when I can, and move on. I'm not going to navel gaze and create a new language and belief system to explain the difficulties I am experiencing.

Again, major assumptions. It seems you assume that use of certain words and believing certain things, leads to some sort of superiority complex whereby we excuse ourselves from adhering to societies' rules.

Nothing could be further from the truth. Understanding how NT brains work differently from mine gives me a way to communicate better with them.

In a word, nothing...scientifically speaking. They are subjective stories and if we have had similar experiences we can relate to them. That would be about it. :)

In a word bull****. Scientifically speaking I'm as valid a subject as any. Whilst it is true that they are 'subjective' ie specific to myself it does not follow that you need to relate to them.

They illustrate that AD/HD and Aspergers minds can be very active and advantageous and using the word 'scientific' to try to disparage these stories is the act of a closed and 'unscientific' mind.

Thanks for acknowledging your rudeness in past posts on this thread, it really is appreciated. :)

Science explains

The simplest most explanatory model wins.

SB, this is the first time that I have heard that simplicity is the determining factor in science :( (...and of all that you think is wrong with what I say). As I know it, when there are two models, the one with the best evidence supporting the thesis is considered the better model at any given moment in time. As new evidence comes to light this can change, as can the original thesis. Simplicity does not always win...ie, the earth is flat and we are the middle of the universe.

Simplicity does not always win...ie, the earth is flat and we are the middle of the universe.

exactly

The simplest most explanatory model wins+ Tease apart the distinction between
simplest
and
most immediate model -
- and you'll see what I'm getting at.


Earth is flat == most immediate
Earth is round becomes the simplest most explanatory model as soon as model 'flat Earth' creaks.
'Round Earth' - though is much more abstract to encapsulate -
- because a round Earth can't be seen.

Look into the sky -
- roundish planets -
eventually one will begin to doubt model 'flat Earth'

--- and then reflected onto ADD ---

why suspicions ?

most obviously -
- the nature of the distinction between mental disease and physical disease -
I have asthma - there are no advantages to it -
- there's no point in denying this

- however -
mental disease is different -

- mental disease relates to some aspect of man -
- which is peculiarly human

- mental disease appears to be growing quite alarmingly in prevalence - and yet in these technologically advanced times

why are/were so many great minds (especially as of recent) mentally diseased ?
- and of the disorders of mind - why is it that ADHD is very specifically exposed only under certain social conditions ?

most of us would be able to eliminate our problems given a different kinda' society

- my points all being towards the idea that although you might be correct -
how can anybody tell unless people listen with an open mind?

It's very difficult to offer novel perspectives on any given problem -
- and to be met by

- 'well, how come this expert doesn't say so ?'

Not a particularly useful stance

- like it or not experts have vested interest -
what if along came a new technology which might render your job superfluous ?
- the survival instinct kicks in and we abandon logic -

- and that's all there is to it -

experts - who think that they know best -
- and who do not
- because of their Institutionalised ways -

it isn't a co-incidence that Dr Hallowell has made such a great contribution to our understanding of ADD -
as an ADDer

- there are some perspectives which only we can adopt.

In a word bull****. Scientifically speaking I'm as valid a subject as any. Whilst it is true that they are 'subjective' ie specific to myself it does not follow that you need to relate to them.

They illustrate that AD/HD and Aspergers minds can be very active and advantageous and using the word 'scientific' to try to disparage these stories is the act of a closed and 'unscientific' mind.

Myth building starts with stories. If we are to determine if the "mythology" of Neurotypicals vrs ADHDers, is in fact real, then I can think of no better place to start then the with the scientific method. Sure you are a valid subject and subjective viewpoints have their place...just not when we are studying the possibility that a mythology may be real.

The DSM thingy seems to be a sticking point for some. Once again if a positive attribute had predictive powers for ADHD it would be in the DSM. For example if creativity had an extremely high predictive power, Dr's would use it to as one pillar of a diagnosis. They wouldn't be treating your creativity, they would look to see if your creativity was like the creativity of others with ADHD. Studies have been done and creativity really isn't a positive attribute for those with ADHD in comparison to the general population.

SB I appreciate your efforts but really your post is built on assumptions that I would disagree with. There is nothing wrong with having your opinion as there is nothing wrong with mine. I base my opinion as best I can to evidence based science. I'm going away for a vacation. Have a good weekend.

The DSM thingy seems to be a sticking point for some. Once again if a positive attribute had predictive powers for ADHD it would be in the DSM. For example if creativity had an extremely high predictive power, Dr's would use it to as one pillar of a diagnosis. They wouldn't be treating your creativity, they would look to see if your creativity was like the creativity of others with ADHD. Studies have been done and creativity really isn't a positive attribute for those with ADHD in comparison to the general population.



The whole point of creativity is that it is UNLIKE, not LIKE.