ADHD - Does it really need medication?

[SuSa]

Random Links:
http://www.helpguide.org/mental/adhd_medications.htm

Hell, it may even risk your chances of a heart attack:
http://www.nydailynews.com/lifestyl..._an_increased_risk_of_sudden_cardiac_dea.html


OK, thread in tactical made me want to bring this up because of my feelings on the subject (which I share with a friend who used to be on Ritalin (Forget the spelling of it)


Is the ability to be able to concentrate better (normally one of the main reasons) really worth the risks? Is it needed? So you have a poor attention span, maybe you are hyper often. Is that truly a problem?

To be honest I find it rather enjoyable to be around those with ADHD. I don't even consider it a real medical condition but it sure as hell beats saying "friends with bad attention spans and always seem to be on a sugar rush". We are almost never bored, we have some great conversations, and overall the time spent is almost always memorable. I've never had my friend complain about ADHD, it's never been an issue to him.

Many of my friends with ADHD don't even seem to have it. They say they do, they are supposed to be taking their medication - they just don't. To be honest, I can't even tell the difference between when they are on their meds or not....

Discuss.

 

[The Sauce Boss]

"Most healthcare providers accept that ADHD is a genuine disorder; debate in the scientific community centers mainly around how it is diagnosed and treated."--wikipedia

I think this sums it up. I believe it is a real disorder and can be troublesome to some people, but most people can get by without medication. I also have met quite a few people who have supposedly been diagnosed with ADHD and choose not to take medication. And I am sure there are people out there that really are helped by medication too. It really just comes down to if an individual personally feels the rewards are greater than the risks of taking medication. There are many situations where the ability to concentrate is VERY important, such as school, so I wouldn't shrug it off like nothing wrong can come of having the disorder. I just feel that most people are misdiagnosed because of the very general symptoms. Evidence to support this includes the fact that boys are diagnosed twice as likely as girls, which I believe to be due to boys being stereotyped as more impulsive and rowdy than girls.

 

[SuSa]

I still feel it's a "so you happen to be hyperactive/have a short attention span" sort of thing...

Also I was unable to find any disorder regarding being to happy/joyful (to be honest I didn't look hard). Does this mean a disorder is only considered a disorder if it's "bad"? That raises a small point about ADHD. Obviously it can't be beneficial to have it (from what I know) therefore it is treated as a "disorder". However I'm not a doctor or work in the healthcare field so my opinion on that matter is pretty insignificant.

I am sure there are many there helped by the medication (you can't really call it medication if it makes you more hyper and less attentive...) because that's all it really can do.. improve those areas. That's the point of taking it, correct?

I was told I have ADD. My mother almost laughed at the person who diagnosed me. However to remain mature she didn't. On the car ride home, we were laughing our ***** off. I have never had an issue with completing a task and I don't lose focus on something unless I just don't care... While ADD isn't ADHD, it's pretty close. So I'll agree with you on the misdiagnosed parts.

 

[The Sauce Boss]

There actually are situations where being too elated or happy can be a problem. It is called mania and it is characterized by euphoric moods. It is pretty much the opposite of depression, or the high side of bi-polar disorder. It can be dangerous because people feel invincible and take risks that can get them hurt. For instance, I once heard about a person dodging traffic during a manic episode.

 

[SuSa]

There actually are situations where being too elated or happy can be a problem. It is called mania and it is characterized by euphoric moods. It is pretty much the opposite of depression, or the high side of bi-polar disorder. It can be dangerous because people feel invincible and take risks that can get them hurt. For instance, I once heard about a person dodging traffic during a manic episode.

The more I know, however is it its own condition or an extreme of Bi-Polar disorder?

I understand how that could be dangerous, however I was talking about happy. Not... invincible or anything. Just happy.

Like "Oh, my pet dog just died. All well." sort of happy.

 

[The Sauce Boss]

It can be it's own condition, although it is most commonly associated with bipolar disorder.

 

[Pierre the Scarecrow]

ADHD is a legitimate and real medical condition. However, that does not change the fact that it and its relative, ADD, can be very hard to diagnose, and many children are diagnosed with ADD or given attention medication when they simply do not need it. There is no objective test to diagnose ADHD, so it is based completely on clinical diagnosis.

Many children are simply hyperactive or have not simply been taught what is appropriate. It is very hard to expect a child to have developed thorough self-discipline before they hit puberty. However, ADHD is still a real medical condition that really needs medication.

You cannot base your argument on stories of friends' experiences and you cannot act like the media and take a stance based on what you hear.

 

[Riddle]

The problem with diagnosing ADHD is that we have not found a specific cause, and thta the intensity of ADHD greatly varies. Thus, it is hard to diagnose ADHD correctly and there are many incorrect diagnoses.

Thus, I believe that medication should only prescribed for cases where it is very obvious that they have ADHD, and that they will not be able to function normally in school etc. If the case is mild enough or if a kid is wrongly diagnosed then ther should be no need for medication and it would be advised to not take it. Methylphenidate(Ritalin) can cause many bad side effects including insomnia and growth supression. Anywways, low-levels of ADHD can have good results, such as forgivingness, creativity, and humor.

All info comes from http://web4health.info/en/answers/adhd-menu.htm.

P.S. come on guys. Try to cut down on the anecdotes/stories.

 

[SuSa]

You cannot base your argument on stories of friends' experiences and you cannot act like the media and take a stance based on what you hear.

"You cannot base any of your arguments off of friends or yourself and you cannot cite the media either."

So exactly how does anyone prove anything? I think you worded what you wanted to say correctly the wrong way.....

 

[Riddle]

"You cannot base any of your arguments off of friends or yourself and you cannot cite the media either."

So exactly how does anyone prove anything? I think you worded what you wanted to say correctly the wrong way.....

you forgot the know getting arguments from what you hear. So you basically have to be a deaf hermit with no internet/TV/newspaper access.

 

[Pierre the Scarecrow]

You cannot base your argument on stories of friends' experiences and you cannot act like the media and take a stance based on what you hear.

"You cannot base any of your arguments off of friends or yourself and you cannot cite the media either."

So exactly how does anyone prove anything? I think you worded what you wanted to say correctly the wrong way.....

Well, when you changed the minutiae of what I said by paraphrasing only a section of what I said, it kind of lost its meaning.

I said you can't act like the media and take a stance based on what you hear. By this, I mean that there is a trend similar to shock journalism where television stations will air headlines like IS CHOCOLATE KILLING AMERICA? and will seemingly take a stance based on the simplest of facts only to keep the viewer occupied and interested through commercial breaks, only to reveal the entire story later if ever.

I said that you can't take a stance based on what you hear. That wasn't mean to translate directly to "you cannot cite the media." But when gathering facts and making your own opinion, you have to work with more than just what you are told or a single article that you find. You have to research. To answer your question, one proves something by using multiple accurate and reliable sources that are readily available to anyone listening.

Hopefully I'm not being too tangential and I'm expressing what I mean accurately.

 

[HawaiianJigglyPuff]

If you're worried about ritalin, this might be the answer

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yj72e5q61Fs

I think it's smart for ADHD. (which is the topic at hand)

For ADD, I'd say adderall is still a good answer. (it works SO well.)

 

[Pierre the Scarecrow]

Honestly, I think that spins the topic in a whole new direction that could fill a thread of its own.

If someone is personally worried that ritalin is not the right answer to their ADHD, they should be talking to their doctor, not debating on the internet.

 

[xLeafybug =D]

I was "diagnosed" with ADHD about 5 years ago. The first thing doctors tried to do to me was try to give me a bunch of random medication that caused nothing but health problems for me (Insomnia, Migraines, random nosebleeds and random joint and muscle pain to name a few). Within a week of being off the medication, I felt much better.

I believe that ADHD doesn't require anything but determination and hard work. I just finished my school year with a 85% average, with 3 IB courses.

Of course, this is just my experience. I can't speak for others.

 

[.Marik]

I have ADHD, or so I was told my entire life.

To be quite honest, I think I do have ADHD. I can't concentrate, and I do some bizarre and strange things when I'm not taking my medication. My hyper behaviour simply can't be controlled at times.

I've been on medications my entire life, and I have a certified heart disorder called Supraventricular Tachycardia which can be read about here. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supraventricular_tachycardia <---

So as you can see, these medications have increased the risks of me having attacks, and the current ones I'm on absolutely drain me of any energy I may happen to have. They make me tired, weak, and lethargic.

But, I do notice a difference when I'm not taking them. I don't want to take them, and I think it's a load of bullsh*t, but all the medications do is release a chemical which simply makes you more tired than you normally would be, so hyperactive kids don't have as much energy.

ADHD is supposedly caused by two *wires* (for lack of better wording) which are normally connected, but aren't, which creates an increase in hyper and irrational behaviour.

I would recommend that people don't take medications to treat ADHD or ADD if they can possibly help it, the consequences after a few years of taking them are greater than the risk they're preventing.

And besides, doctors have very shallow grounds to prove whether somebody is actually ADHD. It could be the person's personality, but you would never know, would you?

LOL @ Leafybug being ADHD. There's no way that's accurate, you're one of the calmest people I've met.

So, that's my rather biased opinion on the matter.

 

[CStick]

I have ADD; my brother has ADHD

I believe that medication, at least when the person is young, is probably very essential. Many people can deal with the disorder just fine (ex: me. I go to school, hold a job, can get through priorities, etc.). But, I only had ADD.

Many of the symptoms, if untreated or unable to be managed, can lead to people turning into...well, my brother. Lack of hygiene, oppositional behavior, getting kicked out of school, not learning how to live and adult life, not listening to my parents when the computer or TV is on, etc. It can basically interfere with having a normal life and put one on the path to being dead-beat and pretty much incurably selfish and immature. All of the symptoms as listed on the wiki page for it coincide with his general nature and behavior. This all happened when we thought he was ready to be taken off the meds, but he pretty much backfired. He is back on the meds, and doing somewhat better, but I would say that a good deal of his social problems come from his inability to manage the symptoms - even when on meds at times.

So yes, I believe that medication is very helpful, in in many cases should be used for treatment in order to ensure that the afflicted person can manage the disorder, especially if they show signs of being overwhelmed by it and possibly carrying it into their adulthood.

However, there are two problems with using the meds: 1) it can cause adverse effects (such as depression, or worsening an underlying condition of depression) and 2) because of how differently everyone's body reacts, it may be near-impossible to prescribe the proper amount of medication that can treat the problem, but also not cause any of the mentally dangerous side effects. (I'll never forget how droned out i always was while taking Aderol when I was younger)
but overall, I think they can do a lot of help - especially in the younger years of a diagnosed ADHD person.

 

[thegreatkazoo]

I am a little surprised that no one has approached the medication story in terms of the revenues generated. While 3-5% of children under 19 worldwide are diagnosed with ADHD, the numbers in the US have up to 14% diagnosed with ADHD.

Differences can immediately be seen in the very method in how it is diagnosed. The U.S. uses the DSM-IV guidelines almost exclusively, while the rest of the world typically uses the ICD-10 guidelines. When diagnosed under the DSM guidelines, the numbers for those diagnosed jump up 5 fold. Coincidence--I think not!

To add to this, there is the 800 pound gorilla that is the US phramacuteical industry. With the $291 billion the industry makes in selling pills alone (and this was only from last year), it is one of the few sectors in the US that seems recession proof. Where does ADHD medication fall into the mix? It is currently in the top 125 largest selling drugs in the US, with revenues over $864 million a year.

While I do believe that ADHD is real, I can't help to notice how it may be overdiagnosed for the sake of profit, as demonstrated above.

 

[.Marik]

While I do believe that ADHD is real, I can't help to notice how it may be overdiagnosed for the sake of profit, as demonstrated above.

Words can't describe how true this statement is.

Think of how many patients are diagnosed with some sort of "disorder", especially in the United States.

This reminds me of that South Park episode where the doctors diagnosed all the kids with ADHD simply because they couldn't stay awake during the session of an extremely long book, for profit received from the distribution of the Ritalin.

 

[omnicloud7strife]

To be honest I find it rather enjoyable to be around those with ADHD.

I am only responding to this single statement. The reason I am responding to it is because of my own case of ADHD. I feel it's important for me to dissuade anyone of thinking that this post isn't personal, because it truly is.

I've had ADHD all my life. The whole ****ed time. Throughout my twenty one years of life, I've been on a large variety of different medications designed specifically to handle the ADHD, prescribed by doctors in specific doses, and taken at fairly regular, set periods of time.

With all this said, there have also been times when I have not been on my medication. These times are frequently filled with joy, exuberance, and wild excitement. They are also truly terrifying.

You must understand, SuSa, that being around those with ADHD is not nearly as bad as having it.

I will admit, this problem can come in a variety of intensities. But, that is true of every single disorder listed in the DSM-IV (Diagnostic Statistical Manual IV). No two people present problems the exact same way. Some people have mild forms, while others have forms of disorders that are crippling.

Now, I'd like to return to my point about how, when I am off medication, I am terrified. The reason I say I am terrified is not because I fear distraction, but because I cannot focus. I cannot do the things I love to do. I can't sit down and eat a proper meal, or hold a discussion, or write a post in a timely manner. Hell, I can't play Smash for more than ten, fifteen minutes, TOPS. I can't even watch TV. I get distracted. By nothing. Let me repeat that. I get distracted by nothing. My own thoughts bring me away from what I'm doing. I cannot control what I think of, though I can control my actions, to a point. I become highly impulsive, say things before I even realize I'm speaking, let alone realize what I'm saying, move erratically, skip over large, sweeping portions of conversations, shout, can't sleep, and act something not quite manic, but rather close.

So, forgive me, SuSa, and Proving Grounds group. This post might not help solve the debate, or even allow people to come to a conclusion.

But, being around people with ADHD might be fun for you... But having it is not always fun for us.

~Omni~

 

[GOD!]

@ topic :

No it doesn't, it just needs to be told to leave in Jesus name.
That's right, I said it.

Additionally, I know several kids with ADD. I went on a youth group trip with one of them and I could tell that he stopped taking his medication. He was definitely very active and excitable, but usually (when he was on his medication, I assume) he is very loud and confrontational. Watching him become a very vibrant person was quite interesting. This could be because of a different diet, sleep schedule, or just the new scenery he was around (we went to Canada), but it's a thought.

Another kid seems to have very mild ADD, but he has taken medication for the past 5 years consistently. Personally, I think his mom just doesn't want to put in the work of raising a livelier kid so she just lets the drugs do the work. That is quite an accusation, but luckily she'll never know about it (I'm also very sure it's true).

And in terms of making $$: I think it's kind of easy to think that it's all about money. Just because the industry is thriving doesn't mean it is doing so through some enormous scandal.

Also, as stated by someone else, we really have no idea what causes ADHD. We also have no real idea how the brain works at all. I think at the moment, medication should be reserved for extreme cases. Maybe kids these days need a bit more time outside as well..

 

[Kewkky]

I have ADHD, and let me tell you, from a 2nd person point of view, it may seem nicer when we're not medicated, but I myself prefer being medicated and controlling myself... I'll give you a couple of examples as to how this affects our attention span:

1) In a math exam I had last semester, I was using my calculator to find the answer for a couple of trigonometry problems. First problem, done SO FAST without the calc... 2nd, same as first... By when I was halfway done, I stumbled upon a problem that gave me a weird answer. I thought to myself "This problem seems kinda weird... I'd better try with the calculator". I started hammering commands into it, trying to find ways of how I can answer the problem AND write down the process. While I was doing different ecuations, I started trying to find answers to previous problems, trying to remember problems on my notebook, trying to find the answer to imaginary problems... I even learned how the other buttons on my calculator worked from playing around with it! I noticed I wasn't doing my exam when I had to give it in, and I got a pretty bad grade because of that. Had I been medicated by that time, I wouldnt've lost my concentration so easily.

2) When I'm talking to people about something they don't understand fully, i try my best to explain it to them the simplest of ways so they don't miss a detail. Sometimes I try to explain it so well I completely forget what it is that I was talking about in the first place. Imagine this during oral presentations, or while explaining physics to friends, or helping them with school problems, or anything else that might require extensive thought... It might seem like a funny situation, but there's nothing funny about getting a bad grade or bad job interview due to getting derailed from the topic while talking.

3) My mind is ALWAYS running. It takes me like 3 hours of rolling around my bed before I'm finally tired enough to sleep, because I'm so jittery and full of energy and thoughts that I can't keep myself relaxed. I always find myself thinking about current problems, my future, what to buy with the money I'll be getting, how my life would be with a family, even SCIENCE is something that whirls around my mind every night! I bite my nails more often than a normal person would when stressed, and find myself biting my lips and ripping off skin without noticing I'm doing so at times. Thinking about sexual relations and anything else an adult thinks about, while trying to fall asleep will most likely keep YOU awake at night, too. Unlucky for me, I don't have that 'switch' which should make it easier for me to catch a Z or two.


I forget I have homework, forget I have appointments, forget I have (had, now) medication, and forget I promised people stuff, because I don't give my promises the attention they should receive for me to remember them when I need to. I don't remember what I did a week ago, only the major details. I can't even remember what I wore the day before yesterday, that's how amazingly annoying this is! I've even started writing text messages to send people, only to start thinking of what I want to eat midway then closing my cellphone and deleting the whole message. And this is just my short attention span, imagine my overflowing energy!

I seriously believe it needs medication in order for the person to really have a chance at a normal life, which is something I wish to have access to. Sure, medication is not a MUST, as it is not a life-threatening disorder... But in a social viewpoint, it is. I used to get medication, but got off of it because my parents started yelling at me and stating that I would become an addict, and they'd NEVER leave me alone about it. Once I turn 21, I'm going to see a psychiatrist by myself and keep the pills a secret.

ADHD in people can also be the catalyst to several psychiatric conditions, most common being depression and anxiety disorders. I never got to clarify with my doctor, but we discussed that I may be also suffering from a form of depression (either I'm hypomanic, or it's silent migraines that make me change the way I act at times, since I get those officially).


tl;dr: I believe it needs medication. It's not a MUST, though, you can live without it, but you won't have the highest life quality you can achieve.


EDIT: GOD!, science has come to understand how the brain works pretty well, just not as much as they understand every other organ in the body. The brain is much more complex than today's computers, but we have an idea of what it does, how it controls things, what areas of the brain have to do with our actions, and other such basic info... We also have an idea of what causes ADHD, which is practically an increase in the production of some of the brain's chemicals: it's a biological defect... Medication should be given not when the case is too extreme, but before the case REACHES said extreme, since it's made to prevent, treat, control and/or cure physical/mental problems... And yes, we ADHD sufferers need more outside time. But in the end, it's not the answer to our dilemma. When I was a kid, I was in baseball, basketball, volleyball, swimming, tae kwon-do, and track-and-field. Didn't do much in the long run...

I guess some people just grow out of ADHD, and others don't. I'm one of those that still hasn't grown out of it.

 

[thegreatkazoo]

To Omni & Kewkyy--while your points are valid, I have one question to ask:
Do you think ADHD is overdiagnosed though.

Just a point of inquiry.

 

[Kewkky]

To Omni & Kewkyy--while your points are valid, I have one question to ask:
Do you think ADHD is overdiagnosed though.

Just a point of inquiry.

Well, I DO think it is overdiagnosed. There are lots of people who exhibit symptoms of ADHD, but to a less extent, one that doesn't imply they need medication. Only in cases where it's obvious their lives would work better, is there a need to diagnose and treat. I was actually very disappointed with how they re-diagnosed me at 19yrs of age... They gave me a list of symptoms and told me to rate myself from 0-5... I facepalmed mentally. Anyone can skew these results if they know nothing about how a real ADHD person acts like! I even argued about it with my therapist.


EDIT: And I've also had ADHD my entire life. My childhood is filled with horrible memories of my dad beating me up because he couldn't stand any more of my lack of self-control. I can't even believe half of the things my parents tell me I used to do while I was a child, let alone remember them!

 

[omnicloud7strife]

To Omni & Kewkyy--while your points are valid, I have one question to ask:
Do you think ADHD is overdiagnosed though.

Just a point of inquiry.

From the DSM-IV:
Six (or more) of the following symptoms of hyperactivity-impulsivity have persisted for at least 6 months to a degree that is maladaptive and inconsistent with developmental level:

Hyperactivity

• often fidgets with hands or feet or squirms in seat
• often leaves seat in a classroom or in other situations in which remaining seated is expected
• often runs about or climbs excessively in situations in which it is inappropriate (in adolescents or adults, may be limited to subjective feelings of restlessness)
• often has difficulty playing or engaging in leisure activities quietly
• is often "on the go" or often acts as if "driven by a motor"
• often talks excessively

Impulsivity

• often blurts out answers before questions have been completed
• often has difficulty awating turn
• often interrupts or intrudes on others (e.g., butts into conversations or games)

Phew, that was long to type out by hand. o.o

There's more to diagnosing that, but you can see how long the list for JUST ADHD is, which is not the same as the list for ADD, which you can have symptoms of and be ADHD. They are not exclusive.

Do I think that it's over diagnosed? I think it used to be a lot more than it is now. There was a time in history when most children in certain countries were diagnosed with it, and I think at that particular time it was a bit overdone. But, as it stands now? I don't think it is anymore. The way people eat, and WHAT they eat (if you knew what food was made of nowadays, you might just go organic... another topic) drastically effects children in the womb. What a mother puts into her body, a child eats. If it's not good for her, it's even worse for the infant. So, now, we see even more cases of it, which are more - in my mind - reliable, or honest, if you prefer.

Following that, if two people with ADHD get together, and have a child, well then, you're that much more likely to have a child with ADHD. Or, some other mental disorder.

I feel I should point out that ADHD comes in varying intensities, from extremely mild, to socially crippling. When I'm off meds, I can't make friends. Because, I interrupt, I speak too loud, and a dozen other reasons I just don't feel like going into. But, there are people with ADHD that are just... energetic. They don't need the same amount of medication I need. They might (and I stress might) not need medication at all. But, for the most part, I think doctors do their best for each patient, and it is very, very difficult to prescribe for anyone under 24, due to the way the frontal lobes of the brain develop. Still, they try very hard to help, and I respect that.

The short answer to this is: I don't think it's over diagnosed. I think that it might be over prescribed. But, not over diagnosed.

Legal Disclaimer: I am not a doctor. I am not a psychologist. I am not a psychiatrist. I cannot diagnose you, nor can I prescribe for you. You should not take anything I've said here in a manner that would ignore doctor advice. If you are on medication, I urge you to continue it, until you see a doctor about stopping. Do not take this post to mean that you should stop doing whatever it is you are doing. It is important to be cautious with medication that effects brain chemistry.

 

[F1ZZ]

Of course ADHD is overdiagnosed because of profit. In some cases though people do need the treatment. At the age of 9 I had a friend who would come over and do sleepovers. This boy was a kind and of a gentle spirit. Whenever his parents dropped him off they would make sure that he took his pill. One time though he forgot to take his pill. The once kind and gentle spirited boy was loud and we were not able to control him. It was so bad that the neighbours came over to see what went wrong. Quite frankly it scared my parents and myself into calling his parents. The end result was that his parents were called and gave him his pill. The parents of this boy were so embrassed of how their child acted that they ended our friendship. Soon afterwards I asked my mother of what happened. My mom explained that my friend had ADHD and that he could not control what happened that day.

To this day it still bothers me that his parents ended our friendship all because of their child having ADHD. Why be embrassed of your son? He couldn't control what happened and he simply forgot to take his pill. If they thought that I was going to make fun of him, they thought wrong because I would never judge someone due to their problem. The whole world has problems and to judge someone because of a problem is just wrong.

I do believe ADHD deserves medication but it is sad to say that people do overdiagnose ADHD just to gain profit.

 

[Aesir]

I'm willing to bet all of you with ADHD or ADD probably don't have it. You're usually diagnosed with it by the 4th grade and it's usually the boys who are diagnosed with it. Are you guys noticing a fallacy with this yet? We're drugging young boys for being too hyper and labeling it ADHD, just think about that for a second.

I'll include a personal story real quick. I was diagnosed with it in the first grade apparently I was really rambunctious, my mom was against putting me on medication but the school pressured her into doing it (something that is now illegal) so I was on it until the 5th grade, which I became hyper active again, it wasn't until the 6th grade did I grow out of it and stopped showing signs of ADHD, which leads me to believe I probably didn't have it or I out grew it.

Moral of the story is, Schools just want an easy way out so they diagnose you with ADHD.

 

[thegreatkazoo]

From the DSM-IV:
Six (or more) of the following symptoms of hyperactivity-impulsivity have persisted for at least 6 months to a degree that is maladaptive and inconsistent with developmental level:

Hyperactivity

• often fidgets with hands or feet or squirms in seat
• often leaves seat in a classroom or in other situations in which remaining seated is expected
• often runs about or climbs excessively in situations in which it is inappropriate (in adolescents or adults, may be limited to subjective feelings of restlessness)
• often has difficulty playing or engaging in leisure activities quietly
• is often "on the go" or often acts as if "driven by a motor"
• often talks excessively

Impulsivity

• often blurts out answers before questions have been completed
• often has difficulty awating turn
• often interrupts or intrudes on others (e.g., butts into conversations or games)

Phew, that was long to type out by hand. o.o

Knew that already--also, there is no need to type out a point which has been already brought up. If anyone wanted to see the guidelines, they could click on my link.

There's more to diagnosing that, but you can see how long the list for JUST ADHD is, which is not the same as the list for ADD, which you can have symptoms of and be ADHD. They are not exclusive.

Do I think that it's over diagnosed? I think it used to be a lot more than it is now. There was a time in history when most children in certain countries were diagnosed with it, and I think at that particular time it was a bit overdone. But, as it stands now? I don't think it is anymore. The way people eat, and WHAT they eat (if you knew what food was made of nowadays, you might just go organic... another topic) drastically effects children in the womb. What a mother puts into her body, a child eats. If it's not good for her, it's even worse for the infant. So, now, we see even more cases of it, which are more - in my mind - reliable, or honest, if you prefer.

Following that, if two people with ADHD get together, and have a child, well then, you're that much more likely to have a child with ADHD. Or, some other mental disorder.

I feel I should point out that ADHD comes in varying intensities, from extremely mild, to socially crippling. When I'm off meds, I can't make friends. Because, I interrupt, I speak too loud, and a dozen other reasons I just don't feel like going into. But, there are people with ADHD that are just... energetic. They don't need the same amount of medication I need. They might (and I stress might) not need medication at all. But, for the most part, I think doctors do their best for each patient, and it is very, very difficult to prescribe for anyone under 24, due to the way the frontal lobes of the brain develop. Still, they try very hard to help, and I respect that.

The short answer to this is: I don't think it's over diagnosed. I think that it might be over prescribed. But, not over diagnosed.

Do you have some stats on the veracity of the claim that two ADHD parents are more likely to have an ADHD child? Just a point of inquiry.

Also, are you possibly splitting hairs between over diagnosed & over prescribed? While I know that correlation does not imply causation, I also know that America is nation that likes its drugs (see my previous post above). To put it in another way: In America, does a diagnosis of some disease/disorder mean that you will be medicated? Just another point of inquiry.

Of course ADHD is overdiagnosed because of profit. In some cases though people do need the treatment. At the age of 9 I had a friend who would come over and do sleepovers. This boy was a kind and of a gentle spirit. Whenever his parents dropped him off they would make sure that he took his pill. One time though he forgot to take his pill. The once kind and gentle spirited boy was loud and we were not able to control him. It was so bad that the neighbours came over to see what went wrong. Quite frankly it scared my parents and myself into calling his parents. The end result was that his parents were called and gave him his pill. The parents of this boy were so embrassed of how their child acted that they ended our friendship. Soon afterwards I asked my mother of what happened. My mom explained that my friend had ADHD and that he could not control what happened that day.

To this day it still bothers me that his parents ended our friendship all because of their child having ADHD. Why be embrassed of your son? He couldn't control what happened and he simply forgot to take his pill. If they thought that I was going to make fun of him, they thought wrong because I would never judge someone due to their problem. The whole world has problems and to judge someone because of a problem is just wrong.

I do believe ADHD deserves medication but it is sad to say that people do overdiagnose ADHD just to gain profit.

Glad you agree with me, but keep the stories to a minimum.

 

[omnicloud7strife]

I'm willing to bet all of you with ADHD or ADD probably don't have it. You're usually diagnosed with it by the 4th grade and it's usually the boys who are diagnosed with it. Are you guys noticing a fallacy with this yet? We're drugging young boys for being too hyper and labeling it ADHD, just think about that for a second.

I'll include a personal story real quick. I was diagnosed with it in the first grade apparently I was really rambunctious, my mom was against putting me on medication but the school pressured her into doing it (something that is now illegal) so I was on it until the 5th grade, which I became hyper active again, it wasn't until the 6th grade did I grow out of it and stopped showing signs of ADHD, which leads me to believe I probably didn't have it or I out grew it.

Moral of the story is, Schools just want an easy way out so they diagnose you with ADHD.

That's known as Partial Remission. Which does occur. Also, public schools are now required to deal with children with learning disabilities (up to a point, whereupon other schools, normally smaller in size, are designed to tailor to children with a certain severity of disability). It doesn't matter if they want the easy way out anymore.

Is it possible you were misdiagnosed? Of course it is. If doctors were right 100% of the time, no one would ever be in a botched surgery. No one would be given a medication they reacted poorly to. Is it possible that you were not misdiagnosed? That's also possible.

For the record: I'm 21, and I still have all the signs of ADHD. I know it, both my parents know it, my friends know it (and I'm on medication when they see me). An independent neurologist, who will gain no funds from anyone for saying this, knows it.

And, finally: Schools can't diagnose anything. Unless that school is run entirely by psychologists, and psychiatrists, which is not something that happens.

Knew that already--also, there is no need to type out a point which has been already brought up. If anyone wanted to see the guidelines, they could click on my link.

Do you have some stats on the veracity of the claim that two ADHD parents are more likely to have an ADHD child? Just a point of inquiry.

Also, are you possibly splitting hairs between over diagnosed & over prescribed? While I know that correlation does not imply causation, I also know that America is nation that likes its drugs (see my previous post above). To put it in another way: In America, does a diagnosis of some disease/disorder mean that you will be medicated? Just another point of inquiry.

First: Fair enough.

Second: I concede that I don't, and withdraw my statement to that end.

Third: Yes, I am splitting that hair. Because, the topic is wether or not ADHD needs medication. If the answer is (for the sake of argument, and to make my point) yes, the question that would logically follow is: Does everyone that is prescribed medication for ADHD have ADHD?

More importantly, as I stated before, ADHD can come in a variety of intensities. Not everyone that has ADHD needs medication, and I'm willing to admit that. My older brother has ADHD (perhaps ADD, I can't remember right now) and he takes no medication for it, because he doesn't need it. I have ADHD, and I do need that medication. I've tried taking none, and I can't function. Bah, again, I've gotten so personal. It's difficult to maintain proper distance in this argument.

Hopefully, this clears things up. Feel free to refute me. I'm not at 100% right now, though I don't really know why.

~Omni~

 

[Omnicron's Baklava Enterprises]

I had a friend with ADHD, whom was on a prescription to at least help him with it.
Because of this disorder, he did have all of the included symptoms that Omnicloud stated, which in turn had him at a disadvantage in school.

I remember when he became extremely frustrated because he was made fun of at school for blurting out rude comments about the certain subject we were learning about. He really had it, it was no overdiagnose by a doctor just for profit, he showed obvious symptoms in which typical 3rd-4th Year boys or girls did not have.

The medication did not seem to help, for he still carried out all of his actions. He was constantly reprimanded by our Grade 4 teacher, and he cried quite a few times.

Do medications for ADHD even work? I ask.
It is me or do medications for a disorder such as ADHD seem to fail at aiding the afflicted child? It may have just been that the medication was a bad one, or maybe it was his behaviour that overtook it.

Personally I say that there should be a medication for ADHD, just to help the ones afflicted with their lives in general, consider they perform actions which are considered "out of the ordinary" by others.

Sad thing is, he hardly knew what he was doing to make people dislike him so much.

 

[Kewkky]

Sad thing is, he hardly knew what he was doing to make people dislike him so much.

Yes! Depending on how severe ADHD is, you may not even notice what you're doing wrong. I remember my dad used to beat me up all the time when I was a little kid because of the crazy ******** things I used to do, but honestly, I can't picture a single bad thing that I did in my childhood that would earn me such spankings (20 whips with a belt? What the...?)... So I eventually grew up and resented my dad for doing that... And it was definitely not my medication, for my dad denied me that, because by then Ritalin was the only pill and it would lower my IQ apparently (and I was told to have an IQ of 139 as a boy, when the IQ tests still had some weight). That was when I was 7 years old.

I still have ADHD, and I can't control my actions if I don't eat properly. I dunno, I guess I get anxious and that makes my symptoms seem worse... I literally don't notice if I'm bothering others, talking too much, blurting out what they're about to say before they finish sentences, have less patience, don't notice things that I would normally when I'm in control, and am just downright hyperactive (I jump everywhere because I feel super light, and strong for my physique... And climb up every wall, gate, and tree I can get my hands on). When I eat a lot, I have the energy to hold myself back and think things through, before jumping up and doing them with little to no though in order to finish responsibilities faster.

The bit of time I was taking medication, I felt it working... I got up to like 40mg Strattera (that's the 3rd dosage) before I started having problems around my house, and had to quit in order to live peacefully. I believe medication DOES work, not from observations, but from experimenting myself. I didn't have such huge urges to do things other people would normally think twice before doing.

 

[Omnicron's Baklava Enterprises]

Maybe, with the right type of mental stimulation (well-fed, everyones acceptance, times to look forward to) one with ADHD can overcome some of the symptoms such as fidgeting with fingers or playing with anything in range. That is what my friend needed.
Whenever he had something to look forward to, he would tend to stop with his extreme hyperactivity and calm down.

His life was not a complete nightmare, he had friends and easy-going parents.
I realize I made him sound like a miserable child in my previous post.

 

[thegreatkazoo]

Third: Yes, I am splitting that hair. Because, the topic is wether or not ADHD needs medication. If the answer is (for the sake of argument, and to make my point) yes, the question that would logically follow is: Does everyone that is prescribed medication for ADHD have ADHD?

More importantly, as I stated before, ADHD can come in a variety of intensities. Not everyone that has ADHD needs medication, and I'm willing to admit that. My older brother has ADHD (perhaps ADD, I can't remember right now) and he takes no medication for it, because he doesn't need it. I have ADHD, and I do need that medication. I've tried taking none, and I can't function. Bah, again, I've gotten so personal. It's difficult to maintain proper distance in this argument.

Hopefully, this clears things up. Feel free to refute me. I'm not at 100% right now, though I don't really know why.

~Omni~

I have shown that America has a diagnosis rate of 5 times greater than that of other countries, & that Adderall is in the top 200 in terms of drug sales in the states. Could it be possible that people are being diagnosed for the sake of a profit? Another point of inquiry.

 

[Kewkky]

I have shown that America has a diagnosis rate of 5 times greater than that of other countries, & that Adderall is in the top 200 in terms of drug sales in the states. Could it be possible that people are being diagnosed for the sake of a profit? Another point of inquiry.

It could be, exactly the same as how hungry cops give unfair tickets to drivers, or when corrupt cops plant drugs on random drivers (had happened too many times in PR a year ago... LOTS of cops did it in order to gain profit, they were found and jailed for it)... Selling the drugs MEANS more money, and the medication isn't exactly hazardous to your health, unlike other kinds that increase the rate of kidney failure, heart attacks, psychotic breakdowns and such.

 

[Aesir]

That's known as Partial Remission. Which does occur.

Remission from what? Is that a fancy way of saying that like most kids who are diagnosed with the disorder I didn't have it?

Also, public schools are now required to deal with children with learning disabilities (up to a point, whereupon other schools, normally smaller in size, are designed to tailor to children with a certain severity of disability). It doesn't matter if they want the easy way out anymore.

It wasn't until recently that schools are now not allowed to pressure parents to give their children medication.

Is it possible you were misdiagnosed? Of course it is. If doctors were right 100% of the time, no one would ever be in a botched surgery. No one would be given a medication they reacted poorly to. Is it possible that you were not misdiagnosed? That's also possible.

It's also possible that I went to school during the 90's where the ADHD craze began. Where Doctors had an incentive to "misdiagnose" and schools had an even greater incentive to agree to it. After all a medicated student is just a drone who does it's work without needing disciplinary actions and the doctor gets monetary compensation.

For the record: I'm 21, and I still have all the signs of ADHD. I know it, both my parents know it, my friends know it (and I'm on medication when they see me). An independent neurologist, who will gain no funds from anyone for saying this, knows it.

Cool you're one of the few who actually have it, unlike the rest of us who just happened to be hyper active boys during our elementary school years. I can tell you right now, I was just a hyper active kid when I was young, I in no way have a learning disability, this was made quite apparent when I was taken off the medication.

And, finally: Schools can't diagnose anything. Unless that school is run entirely by psychologists, and psychiatrists, which is not something that happens.

You're right they can't, but low and behold they can sure as hell recommend the stuff and pressure parents to look into those drugs for their kids because they happen to be bored in class.

 

[thegreatkazoo]

Selling the drugs MEANS more money, and the medication isn't exactly hazardous to your health, unlike other kinds that increase the rate of kidney failure, heart attacks, psychotic breakdowns and such.

Homes, you ever watch the CBS Evening News, NBC Nightly News, or what have you? You ever watch the endless amounts of medication they sell? You ever hear the endless (not really, but you get the idea) amounts of side effects these drugs have? Just a point of inquiry.

 

[Kewkky]

Homes, you ever watch the CBS Evening News, NBC Nightly News, or what have you? You ever watch the endless amounts of medication they sell? You ever hear the endless (not really, but you get the idea) amounts of side effects these drugs have? Just a point of inquiry.

I meant the ADHD medications. Like Strattera for example, most of the adverse side effects are about behavior changes and physical manifestations that are far from threatening. It wouldn't surprise me if Strattera (or other such medications with no physically hazardous side effects) was being sold in large quantities just for profit... Suicidal thoughts could be attributed to a type of depression, and yet another medication is now prescribed to the "ADHD" patient. Who's to say the guy doesn't have ADHD? His psychiatrist recommended him to take pills, the guy is obviously gonna listen to the trained professional for his own good, even if it's a lie (or a stretched truth, which is still a lie)...

And from what I myself went through to be re-diagnosed a year ago, I wouldn't doubt people can overexaggerate things to make themselves look worse. All I had to do was fill out a single paper with symptoms, ranging from 0-5 (me, not the doctor!), and give it to him. If I had enough points accumulated, I could be prescribed the medication. It's too easy to cheat on a crappy thing like that! And now with some colleges giving out extra money to people with disabilities (ADHD is marked as one thanks to the DSM-IV), it doesn't take an actor to "act hyperactive and innatentive" to get the medication, never take it, keep the act up, and get free money...

Just my thoughts on that last paragraph.

Remission from what? Is that a fancy way of saying that like most kids who are diagnosed with the disorder I didn't have it?

It means you grew out of part of it. "Partial" means that it's a part of something, and "remission" means that its hiding but still there. "Partial remission" medically speaking, means part of the symptoms are hiding, but you still have the disease.

 

[GoldShadow]

Remission means it's receding or reduced; something in remission is going away and getting better. Partial remission means it's not gone away completely. Someone in remission may still have the disease or symptoms of it, but is getting better (either the disease is going away or the symptoms of it are going away).

 

[hillbillyhick]

From the DSM-IV:
Six (or more) of the following symptoms of hyperactivity-impulsivity have persisted for at least 6 months to a degree that is maladaptive and inconsistent with developmental level:

Hyperactivity

• often fidgets with hands or feet or squirms in seat
• often leaves seat in a classroom or in other situations in which remaining seated is expected
• often runs about or climbs excessively in situations in which it is inappropriate (in adolescents or adults, may be limited to subjective feelings of restlessness)
• often has difficulty playing or engaging in leisure activities quietly
• is often "on the go" or often acts as if "driven by a motor"
• often talks excessively

Impulsivity

• often blurts out answers before questions have been completed
• often has difficulty awating turn
• often interrupts or intrudes on others (e.g., butts into conversations or games)

Can the DSM give any vaguer criteria?

First of all, an appeal to authority (let's start the day with a fallacy): I'm an experimental psychology major and I can tell you I'd be hard pressed to find even one professor at my faculty to say DSM-IV is a reliable diagnostic tool or ADHD is not overdiagnosed.

Now, leaving authorities aside, I'll try and tell you why.
There is nothing statistical about the DSM, I don't see any quantification of anything anywhere. The criteria are so vague that a psychiatric patient is often put into several categories (the average patient is diagnosed with 4 personality disorders). This is evidence that the categorical approach is ineffective. Also interrater reliability is extremely low (different psychiatrists give the same patient different diagnoses).

http://www.zurinstitute.com/dsmcritique.html#summary
(an interesting read, there's even a small piece on adhd)

Also the mental illnesses included and their criteria for diagnosing them are decided (read: voted) upon by a panel of 170 psychiatrists, with 56% of them having financial ties to pharmaceutical companies.

http://www.tufts.edu/~skrimsky/PDF/DSM COI.PDF

Now, don't get me wrong. I'm not bashing on psychiatrists here. Psychiatrists are in general very smart people and most are aware of the problems with the DSM, yet still too much is being relied upon it for diagnostic ends, while it's been pretty clear from a lot of research it's not very good at that. Other methods have been made, such as a dimensional instead of a categorical system (dimensional is on a continuum, while categorical is absolute)

Phew, now on to why ADHD is overdiagnosed. I'm not a clinical psychologist, psychiatrist and have no experience in real life with this, but I'm going to speculate anyway.

It could be that parents nowadays have more trouble with their children, because the children are expected to behave in ways which are very different from the past. My parents have said it a lot: parents just don't let their children play anymore, they can't dirty their clothes, ride their bikes up and down the street, climb up trees,etc... Parents who expect their children to just sit still on the couch all day might create children who, out of sheer boredom, start destroying things around the house, jump on the sofa,etc... Some parents just can't handle this and want to be helped. They don't want to hear or know they're bad parents, they want to hear there's something wrong with their son, they want an explanation that doesn't make them guilty.

Obviously, when more parents seek psychiatric help, the number of adhd diagnoses will go up. My point is, some children diagnosed with adhd aren't extremely active or have extreme attention disorders, parents just want explanations for their bad school results or their misbehavior.

This is of course just wild speculation, but I think this kind of situation happens frequently, especially in urban regions where people have no garden and the kids have to stay indoors all the time.

Also, I'm NOT in any way saying ADHD isn't real. I'm just saying that there are many faulty diagnoses. When a child suffers under its hyperactivity or attention problems, of course help is needed. And psychiatrists should indeed give medication even when there's a good chance the child doesn't really have adhd, suppose they didn't give the meds and the kid DID have adhd, wouldn't that be awful for the kid and his parents.

My speculation is also not directed at anyone on these boards who say they have ADHD, I believe you when you say you have adhd and you would suffer when not having medication.

 

[omnicloud7strife]

Can the DSM give any vaguer criteria?

Okay, first off, let me give you an example of vaguer criteria. Just to point out how vague one can be.

Example: If the subject has a deficit in their attention, and have hyperactive tendencies, they have ADHD.

Now, that's not what it says. But, as an example of vague... It's fairly vague.

First of all, an appeal to authority (let's start the day with a fallacy): I'm an experimental psychology major and I can tell you I'd be hard pressed to find even one professor at my faculty to say DSM-IV is a reliable diagnostic tool or ADHD is not overdiagnosed.

Now, leaving authorities aside, I'll try and tell you why.
There is nothing statistical about the DSM, I don't see any quantification of anything anywhere. The criteria are so vague that a psychiatric patient is often put into several categories (the average patient is diagnosed with 4 personality disorders). This is evidence that the categorical approach is ineffective. Also interrater reliability is extremely low (different psychiatrists give the same patient different diagnoses).

First off, the quantification comes in the varying degrees of disorders it has. Major Depressive, Dysthymic Disorder, Manic Depressive, and how it states, very clearly, that those that present with one of the disorders are often ruled out from others.

There's no argument that personality disorders can be seen in different ways by different people. That's just how the world works. If I hand you a broken glass, and say, "What's wrong with it, specifically?" you, and your three closest friends, will write down different observations about the exact way the glass is broken.

Now, as to your statement, I'd like to remind you, ADHD is not a personality disorder. I'll refer to the DSM-IV, again, to point out what is considered personality disorders:

Axis II
Personality Disorders​

Paranoid Personality Disorder

Narcissistic Personality Disorder​

Schizoid Personality Disorder

Avoidant Personality Disorder​

Schizotypal Personality Disorder

Dependent Personality Disorder​

Antisocial Personality Disorder

Obsessive-Compulsive Personality Disorder​

Borderline Personality Disorder
Histrionic Personality Disorder

Now, I skipped two of the items on Axis II, which are "Other Personality Disorder" (paraphrased), and Mental ***********. They were excluded because the first one is nonspecific, and the second one is not really a personality disorder. Still, you'll find no mention of ADHD, ADD, or any of the other Clinical Disorders (Axis I, if you wanted to know).

http://www.zurinstitute.com/dsmcritique.html#summary
(an interesting read, there's even a small piece on adhd)

Did you read that? Carefully? Absorb every word of it?

It reads like a cult manuscript.

If I may quote from it (and, I'm going to): "The DSM is a powerful tool of social control, as its criteria is a primary tool used to judge who is normal or abnormal, sane or insane or who should remain free or be hospitalized against their will."

Read that to yourself a few times. Think about it. Mentally digest it.

Then, realize how out of one's mind you sound. It suggests that the DSM is used to control people. The DSM is a guide, to help people diagnose. It's not a rigid end all be all. It's a tool. In the same sense that you can build a house without tools, but a hammer would make it go a LOT faster, the DSM is the hammer for those that are trying to diagnose people.

Also the mental illnesses included and their criteria for diagnosticizing them are decided (read: voted) upon by a panel of 170 psychiatrists, with 56% of them having financial ties to pharmaceutical companies.

http://www.tufts.edu/~skrimsky/PDF/DSM COI.PDF

Well, I think you should understand that the panel exists, due in no small part to our growing knowledge of the human brain, our changing understanding of mental disorders, and our fundamental changes as a society.

Example: Homosexuality used to be listed in the DSM. It is now widely felt that it's not a disorder. There's nothing wrong with the person. This said, there's still some fifty pages (ish) on Sexual and Gender Identity Disorders. As a society, we have largely come to accept that people are born gay, lesbian, bi, straight, and so on. We still list off more than a handful of other problems. The DSM-IV reads:

Sexual Dysfunctions are characterized by disturbance in sexual desire and in the psychophysiological changes that characterize the sexual response cycle and cause marked distress and interpersonal difficulty.

I can't say for a fact, as I simply don't know, wether or not there is marked distress and interpersonal difficulty in being gay. I'm straight, and even if I asked a thousand people that weren't, I'd never KNOW if that was true. And, it's not always like that for everyone (again, to my knowledge.) The point I'm making here is that you can't have things cut and dry when it comes to disorders.

Now, to address your issue with pharmaceutical ties. Ties to drug companies doesn't really change the fact that things will be put in the DSM. Even your linked article states, rather clearly, that the ties to a drug company shouldn't exclude anyone from being on the panels for the DSM. It simply calls for transparency. Transparency is, of course, valuable, and should be looked upon with nothing less than respect, or if not, a requirement. Until it is, however, there's very little one can do, other than say that it raises some concern.

Now, don't get me wrong. I'm not bashing on psychiatrists here. Psychiatrists are in general very smart people and most are aware of the problems with the DSM, yet still too much is being relied upon it for diagnostic ends, while it's been pretty clear from a lot of research it's not very good at that. Other methods have been made, such as a dimensional instead of a categorical system (dimensional is on a continuum, while categorical is absolute)

Nifty. Of course, one COULD argue that a continuum is even more rigorous than the categorical approach, as a continuum leaves you the wide area of possibilities, but then says you can't go beyond those listed ones. Categorical allows for the individual to state what parts they feel are strongest, versus weakest, and interpret the diagnosis themselves. But, I digress.

Phew, now on to why ADHD is overdiagnosed. I'm not a clinical psychologist, psychiatrist and have no experience in real life with this, but I'm going to speculate anyway.

It could be that parents nowadays have more trouble with their children, because the children are expected to behave in ways which are very different from the past. My parents have said it a lot: parents just don't let their children play anymore, they can't dirty their clothes, ride their bikes up and down the street, climb up trees,etc... Parents who expect their children to just sit still on the couch all day might create children who, out of sheer boredom, start destroying things around the house, jump on the sofa,etc... Some parents just can't handle this and want to be helped. They don't want to hear or know they're bad parents, they want to hear there's something wrong with their son, they want an explanation that doesn't make them guilty.

Obviously, when more parents seek psychiatric help, the number of adhd diagnoses will go up. My point is, some children diagnosed with adhd aren't extremely active or have extreme attention disorders, parents just want explanations for their bad school results or their misbehavior.

This is of course just wild speculation, but I think this kind of situation happens frequently, especially in urban regions where people have no garden and the kids have to stay indoors all the time.

A better argument for that is it's in the food. Technically, the FDA calls them "Additives". They're not regulated by the FDA, since they're not food, or a drug. They're an Additive. The stuff they put into food, once you know what it is, makes a lot of people very uncomfortable.

Example: I have a food allergy to Yellow Dye 5. It's a common color additive. Have Mountain Dew on hand? It's in there (excluding Pitch Black). How about M&M's? Yep. Cheese? Sure. Shampoo? You bet!

I mention that why? Because, it's made out of a refined version of Coal Tar. What's Coal Tar, you ask?! Go out to the main road. Get down on your hands and knees. Lick the pavement. That's Coal Tar.

And, that's in our FOOD. Ugh. Malnutrition is also a major concern.

Okay, I'm off topic.

Question about your statement: Doesn't it make sense that, when people go looking for something, they have a tendency to find it? I mean, if every parent brought their kid in, every week, for a checkup, we'd probably find more people with other problems. Like the flu.

Also, none of that statement had to deal with people that have ADHD. Just people that are medicated. Granted, you raise... reasonable points. But, they're so far away from the debate.

Also, I'm NOT in any way saying ADHD isn't real. I'm just saying that there are many faulty diagnoses. When a child suffers under its hyperactivity or attention problems, of course help is needed. And psychiatrists should indeed give medication even when there's a good chance the child doesn't really have adhd, suppose they didn't give the meds and the kid DID have adhd, wouldn't that be awful for the kid and his parents.

My speculation is also not directed at anyone on these boards who say they have ADHD, I believe you when you say you have adhd and you would suffer when not having medication.

Is ADHD over diagnosed at all? Sure. Is it reasonable to air on the side of caution? Probably.

But, even you state that people that suffer from ADHD should be given help, which typically comes in the form of medication.

So, I'm going to ask you, very bluntly:

Did you only disagree with the fact that I used the DSM-IV? Because, if you agree that people that have ADHD should be medicated... what were we debating?


PS: Sorry for the delay in response. I was out of state for a few days.

 

[GoldShadow]

One thing about the DSM-IV... way too many people just look at it and make judgments without realizing one very important thing.

The DSM-IV is not a cookbook that anybody can look at and use to diagnose people. It's meant to be used by clinically trained professionals and researchers, not lay people. Of course a medical reference is going to be vague; it can't possibly present everything or it would be at least ten times as thick. This is especially true in psychiatry, where there is even more variability than in other fields of medicine.

The DSM is meant to be used in conjunction with clinical experience, training, education, and knowledge, not in lieu of it.