<p>When I worked in a preschool a couple of summers ago, I recall being much more tolerant of wild behaviors than any of my same age/gender coworkers. Then again, I was probably far more aggressive and figgity as a child than any of them, which may have contributed to my higher levels of tolerance for wild behavior.</p>
<p>In the same vein, might doctors who were “wild” children be less likely to misdiagnose ADD/ADHD than doctors who were better behaved when they were younger? Maybe the former subgroup of doctors recall behaving somewhat similarly in school, while the latter has only limited experience with the types of behavior they’re presented with. Shrinkrap, if you have any knowledge on this, can you please elaborate? Also props for being careful to limit your misdiagnoses of ADD/ADHD.</p>
<p>" Also props for being careful to limit your misdiagnoses of ADD/ADHD. "</p>
<p>Thanks, but hahah! Who is to say?</p>
<p>I think my own bias leans toward the relative objectivity of behavioral rather than academic measures. </p>
<p>I sort of “get” the phenotype of the “hyperactive/impulsive” children, and how to help them think about the pros and cons of the role of medication. The inattentive/motivation measures seem more arbitrary to me. I am trying to be less arbitrary.</p>
<p>I am also intrigued by the racial/ethnic differences in presentation and treatment. The differences are said to be striking, but a little less so recently.</p>
<p>@shrinkwrap. No I don’t have a link to any studies. But so far it seems if that weren’t the case, then most psychiatrists would be morons( something hard to believe since doctors are generally smart )</p>
<p>Equipotential; I don’t understand. They would have to be morons if WHAT wasn’t the case?</p>
<p>Perhaps you mean this part?</p>
<p>"the loss from not diagnosing someone with ADHD is much higher than when some is misdiagnosed. I think that might be why they continue to perscribe Adderall when they know that have a good chance of being tricked. "</p>
<p>I see. Sort of a basic risk vs benefit model. I wonder though, if it is harder when the risk is not so much to the individual patient, but rather to a sort of community. more like a public health model.</p>
<p>Perhaps I should have clarified that the brainwave evaluation is a tool to be used with other assessments to determine if a child truly has ADD. </p>
<p>kmcmom13 and I apparently have had very similar experiences. My S was officially diagnosed with ADHD at age 7. Educators diagnosed him at age 4. We didn’t want to believe the diagnosis. Let me make it clear that I don’t personally know any parent that would WANT to medicate their child for simply being a little antsy. Stunted growth, delayed puberty, permanent tics, stress on the heart, doctor checkup every 6 months, explanations to family and friends…all things to be considered before medicating a child with amphetamine.</p>
<p>S’s giftedness allowed him to earn top grades, despite himself, until age 10. There is so much more to ADD/ADHD than just what is on the surface. It is the way a child behaves that is different from others isolating him from the social group. It is the way he is reprimanded constantly for things out of his control. All these negatives work on the psyche to make for a real lonely individual that doesn’t make the proper close personal connections with peers during the informative years. That is why a lot of these kids turn to recreational drugs to self-medicate, to be a part of the crowd…they simply want to feel like everyone else and they do this by NOT feeling like themselves. Think back to your childhood and you probably knew kids like this.</p>
<p>But, back to the original article, “Study Drugs.” Comparing a student taking a prescribed medication for a documented condition with a non-ADHD student simply popping some speed to stay awake are two different things. Kids with ADHD on a PROPER DOSAGE of amphetamine are NOT amped up. They are simply now on a level playing field with the non-ADHD kids. For students to sit around and think this unfair is laughable. It’s too bad it is so easy to throw the first stone. Also, for kids peddling their prescription meds to other kids, this is not only illegal, but basically they are the new age white collar drug dealers. Nice.</p>
<p>Technology, though necessary, has created one of the most sleep-deprived and impersonal generations yet. For some reason millions of us managed to sleep; establish actual talking relationships; stay fit; study; hold a job; learn to cook and sew; learn how to change a tire and oil in our car; have dinner with our family; graduate HS and college; all without a cell phone, social media, or study drugs. Hmmm. It’s worth pondering.</p>
<p>This is a decent presentation of the rules that changed in 2009, regarding drug companies influencing doctors. I don’t know if the rules apply in the sale of brain wave technology. </p>
<p>Shrink rap, I suspect the fodder for the blogger I quoted emerged during the decision to regulate the pharma gifts, though it was after the legislation. It will be interesting to see if after a few decades it nets a decline in prescribing these drugs.</p>
<p>I know our family doctor was quite bemused that my son had decided to wait 8 months and finish his freshman year before doing a trial on the Meds during the summer. I understood the doc’s perspective as he himself has a now adult child with ADHD and could reasonably predict a high protein diet alone wasn’t going to cut it the way the Meds would. </p>
<p>(BTW, Umich doesn’t consider ADHD an LD either unless there’s a cognitive processing speed issue, as there can be with inattentive type. Back when mcson was first dx’d with CAPD in Canada, it was considered an LD. Today, the feeling here in the US seems to be that CAPD is actually just a symptom of ADD/PI. Jury’s out for me as the impact is roughly the same – whatever works works at this point ;)</p>
<p>Btw, Halogen, your prudence is admirable and you sound like you have your head on straight, so just play to your strengths If you feel you have some kind of executive function disorder that you’d like to address, and if at some point adderall did work for you despite the anxiety, you may want to look into a careful diet/balance of morning exercise, high protein from good sources, TM, and some behavioral modification work, eg mapping
tasks and working with a coach.
And just so you know, mcson reports that the Meds only work without major side effects if he a) gets a normal amount of sleep b) has a well-balanced diet without long stretches without food. It’s possible to over or under produce dopamine for example if your metabolism isn’t stable, because the amino acids you get from things like protein convert into things that aid the production and regulation of brain chemistry. Forgive the possibly inaccurate nomenclature of this layman’s description, but that’s the gist of it as I understand it I have read studies on this, I’m just sloppy on recall! (The apple doesn’t fall far from the tree…)</p>
<p>At any rate, I enjoyed reading your insights!</p>
<p>“It will be interesting to see if after a few decades it nets a decline in prescribing these drugs.”</p>
<p>As I mentioned above, there has clearly been a decline in researching and developing them. There is almost no way to fund research now. NIMH is trying to help with some small studies.</p>
<p>I study substance use in adolescents and young adults, and reading this NY Times article has inspired me to work on a research project on Adderall use and mental health in competitive universities. After I finish my dissertation and get a job, of course.</p>
<p>I attend an Ivy League and I know there are some students here who use it (as well as other things, like drinking 4 Red Bulls or stuff like that). I’m curious if they know about the risks! I’ve heard passing comments about it and all I’ve heard are positive things, like about how well it works and how focused they feel afterwards.</p>
<p>Pre-meds using drugs eh? Hypocritical. I wouldn’t want a person like that to be my doctor. Plenty of people can get into medical school and through it without drugs so there is no excuses others should take the easy way out (Also a potentially harmful way) to get out of studying harder, studying smarter, and studying better overall.</p>
<p>After all, a doctor can’t be a person that cracks under pressure. A doctor ought to be able to maintain composure and rational thought when treating a patient.</p>
<p>And if a person feels a need to take drugs to do better, that means that their study methods could use some improvement. Sure, one may be successful with a certain method but not as successful as he would like. At this point, whenever viable, that person should experiment with other study methods or revisit older ones that could of worked better.</p>
<p>I’m a senior right now and in preparation for college, I am studying my own study methods and working on refining them. </p>
<p>To succeed on one’s merit means testing one’s own practices and methods to better improve them even if they are good if one knows that they can be even better somehow.</p>
<p>@juillet That’s what they all say to justify their own actions. But the reality is that one doesn’t have to loose sleep and pull all nighters. It all lies in being able to distribute time properly.</p>
<p>Rather then seeing high achieving students who absolutely need to use energy drinks or drugs to do well, it would be more benefitial to students to understand how there are some people who can do extremely well yet still get sleep.</p>
<p>Chances are, the people who need to drink energy drinks in series are those who tend to procrastinate or leave things till close to the deadline. They use drugs or energy drinks to compensate for their currently ineffective work ethics and study methods while other, smarter students, plan their time sufficiently so as to have a life besides studying all night. </p>
<p>Personally, I prefer to get all my work done after school with a few brief breaks in between then leave the bulk of relaxing to the end of the day where I spend my free time on anything along with some light studying before bed. Clubs and extracurriculars are occasional exceptions.</p>
Even though the drugs almost killed you, you still take the drugs???!</p>
<p>One word: addicted and fooled into taking these homeostasis altering toxins… (?) Do you know that on these danger labels (black boxes), they state these drugs should not be used by pregnant mothers because they can cause birth defects??? Why would you want to take a toxin that causes birth defects??? Since the 1990’s scientists, doctors, and concerned citizens fought for these danger labels to be placed on these drugs for YEARS because they saw the effects long before and knew they were harmful, they had to fight with the FDA, now they are required partially to have these black warning boxes on the labels.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And it is NOT rational to not want to go nearly BLIND, numb in the limbs (paralysis), have >160 bpm (beats per minute - ABNORMAL). Do you know Tachycardia is around the same bpm?? You do NOT want tachycardia especially the Ventricular kind (dangerous). Not certain which type you had, either way, it is unwanted unless exercising (even then >160 bpm is quite rigorous - MAX BPM is 200 for a 20 year old). VERY rational to not want to go through this experience again!</p>
<p>
[quote]
My rational opinion of drugs is that they are a perfectly legitimate, if risky, way to improve life in any number of ways. Some people need them to function while others want them for recreation or performance enhancement; all of the above are personal, amoral decisions.
[quote]
No, drugs are not good for recreation or performance enhancement. You do know that those amphetamine-type effects you were experiencing affects the receptors in your neurological system - the sympathetic one/ fight or fight system - which are ALSO experienced by people affected by neuromuscular junction toxins like (as dramatic as it sounds, snake venom - an ACh inhibitor, e.g. the muscarinic receptor, of the parasympathetic system - your rest and digest system).</p>
<p>High blood pressure, high heart rate, increased sweating, pupil dilation… all part of the sympathetic.
Learning that these drugs have the same effect to a slightly lower extent of snake venom, black widow bits, or other neurotoxins (they would 100% if they were given in an overdose), makes many realize this is not good on a daily basis and used only by professionals and ideally, only in response to medical, physical issues NOT feelings, emotions, thoughts, memories, ect which should not be tampered with.</p>
<p>
LSD is a hallucinogen, extremely harmful (LONG list of side effects), and addictive… it is ALSO banned in other countries, e.g., England, where there is a 5 year jail sentence. As you may or may not know, they live longer than we do in the US (we’re ranked 28) and have fewer premature deaths (we rank around 30)… not to say it is due to this… but it could be (they also spend less on pharmaceuticals, we are #1 spenders in the world’s 200 countries, yet it does not appear to be helping, I’m guessing most of this is being spent on drugs like this fake disease “ADHD,” ect/ “mind bending”/“emotional bending” drugs based on false information, $ and NOT on more useful physical/medical drugs to extend life…</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Drugs are NOT good for studying, recreational, ect. They cause Birth defects… what more is there to say? Study physiology… you’ll never want one again (if you know what’s good for you). Of course, if you’re having a heart attack a bit might help when used by a trained paramedic to jump start the heart so it can then be shocked… or to attack a pathogen… ect., but this otherwise would not be done for “fun,” not fun at all to be in the position</p>
<p>I have never used drugs to do well in school but i will always wonder, were these kids right or was I? Many of them get what they want and get great jobs too. </p>
<p>maybe it hurts my karma a bit to wish for this, but i want these cheaters to get hit with health problems and life issues that will prevent their success.</p>
<p>I have some questions about these study drugs. I will preface by saying I have no intention of ever using them and I am already diagnosed with a severe medical condition and the last thing I need is more drugs.</p>
<p>How far do these drugs actually take you? I mean sure, you can get good grades in college but does that really carry over to a job out of college? Or is it just, get good grades, land a job and quit? What if their job performance sucks because they can’t rely on these drugs anymore?</p>
<p>I would also imagine that it must be a really ****ty feeling knowing there are kids out there getting better grades without these drugs (assuming that’s the truth).</p>
<p>Reading that article and similar ones has angered me a LOT. I’m a senior in high school, and my reach school is pretty hard to get in to (Cornell Engineering). I’m pretty sure I won’t get in and reading about kids who use drugs to get in bums me out. I never used these drugs, and it doesn’t exist at my school either (a noncompetitive suburban public school).</p>
<p>So there are kids out there who ruined my:
SAT percentiles (I studied HARD for the SAT and did well… wonder how many of these cheaters put less effort and got the same or better than me? Also, my studying/practicing was over 3 weeks, not just the night before like these kids)
PSAT/NMSQT result - I was a quarter-finalist. The fact that some kids probably used them then beat me to the scholarship is extremely frustrating
AP exam curves
Extracurriculars. See below.
Admissions - Sorry Cornell, but I couldn’t be the kid who had 6 AP classes and a sport and volunteering and an internship all at the same time. Because I didn’t use drugs! And yet Cornell will probably take these kids over me… it’s just infuriating!!!</p>
<p>Are there kids who are legitimately that good? Perhaps. But the fact that it has become the standard for admissions in these types of schools makes kids like me lose out. Did I do something wrong by not taking these drugs? I honestly didn’t know they existed until today! Would I have been valedictorian, with near-perfect SAT, 2000 volunteer hours, internships at NASA, 3x Varsity athlete, etc if I had used them?</p>
<p>Hopefully I’ll get in, because that would prove there IS some hope left for humanity…</p>
<p>“Drug dealer” is such a negative term. Why not call them “independent doctors” or something more positive?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Then they can rely on labor protections and a reluctance of companies to get rid of employees they had to spend a lot to train instead. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It’s gonna take a long time before you’re, or we’re (as a society), gonna find out. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Why not? The good effects are now, the bad are off in the future. I could get hit by a bus today.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Do you know the risks? Does anyone? Or by risk did you mean that we don’t know what the long term side-effects may be.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It’s like blaming the bankers who snort coke to keep up with the work and stay awake for being rich and “successful” because you didn’t feel like destroying your own life for money. Get over it. You make your choices, they make theirs. You could have bought Adderall from someone at your high school or some corrupt “doctor” but you didn’t. They did.</p>
<p>If its addictive to me personally, I wouldn’t use it. If it’s not, sometimes - you just gotta do what you gotta do. Its like drinking in moderation. As long as you don’t develop a dependency, I think these “drugs” are just like caffeinated drinks.</p>
If you feel you have some kind of executive function disorder that you’d like to address, and if at some point adderall did work for you despite the anxiety, you may want to look into a careful diet/balance of morning exercise, high protein from good sources, TM, and some behavioral modification work, eg mapping