AD(H)D Medications
 

Continued from the prescriptions thread:

Research suggests that their is a genetic cause to AD[H]D. Research also shows certain chemical characteristics which are common to those diagnosed with ADHD but not common to the population as a whole. This suggests that chemistry does play a part in those diagnosed with ADHD.

However, whether there is a biological, environmental, or made-up cause to ADHD symptoms is irrelevant to this discussion. What matters is that these medicines work, and they have been shown to do that in an overwhelming number of cases. With that being true, I don't see why you guys oppose ADD medication.

You can also get your stupid ass kid to run around for 2 hours, and not have to spend any money on medicine. With kids watching more TV and playing on the computer for most of their spare time, along with not being as healthy, they're bouncing off of the walls more during Class etc, which is where most of the problems actually exist.

Ineffective for a kid with ADHD.

Which is why those problems should be treated.

I'm not sure what it is called, but wasn't there an (or several) ADD/ADHD medication that was taken off of the market? A few people I know were one of them and figure it might be in one of those commercials that go "If you were given this or this, you could be entitled to X amount of dollars."

Well you can argue either way with this, but another problem is Misdiagnosis, i'm not saying there is no such thing as ADHD, or ADD for that matter, but for a doctor to pocket some extra cash for a pill that isn't harmful, and will "appear" to be working, it's easy for them to recommend it.

No, not misdiagnosis. I'm talking about a certain medication that they used to be on, but now it has been discontinued and they are on another.

No, I was refferring to MJ, sorry. But I do recall what your talking about, no clue to what the medicine was called though.

Fuck that.

Back in the pre-medication days, people did just fine. Nobody went to the doctor and got prescribed medication because they were hyper or had this or that condition. They're just kids. They're supposed to be hyper and play and have an imagination. That's all you know how to do when you're a kid.

In younger kids, there is a tolerable level, and then there is a level where it just gets disruptive. At that point it should be taken care of it it can be. We have the means to take care of it now, why shouldn't we?

The fact that people did fine without it before medication was available is disputable and irrelevant. People also did fine with a cold, usually, before medication to treat cold symptoms was available. Should we also stop taking the 'tussin? I think not.

Tussin does not cure a cold, and Ritalin does not cure bad behavior. They're both more like supressants if anything, and in the end you're most likely better off waiting out the cold or teaching your kid how to behave, not how to take a pill and telling them that they need a pill to behave.

In my personal opinion, that attitude ends you up with adults who pop prescribed anti-depressants rather than actually fixing their depressing situation.

Now, I'm not going to say ADHD doesn't exist, and chronic depression doesn't exist, but I WILL say that a large majority of the time, people use ADHD medications and anti-depressants as an easy fix, and this is not a good attitude to have.

Yes, most of my post is opinionated and I can't back any of it up with facts, but I feel that most of it is true.

Well, if you subscribe to the philosophy that you should allow the body to get better on its own, then by all means don't take Robutussin. But where does it stop? Should you not take antibiotics for infections? Should you not be vaccinated to protect against the flu? Surely, even if you subscribe to the minimal medicine philosophy, there has to be a line you draw which once you cross you will be okay with taking pills, or other forms of medication. You simply draw that line further out than most. I personally do not wish to agonize through the symptoms of a cold without the aid of medicine when it is harmless and easily accessible. I also do not wish to set myself back in class because I can not concentrate like I should be able to. If there is a fix to the problem, I will gladly accept it. Most parents who have their kids take ADD medication probably feel the same way.

If there were severe negative side-effects to the medication, then I would agree with you. Then we should look twice. As it is right now, the side effects are minimal in most cases.

So pretty much your philosophy is "why fix a problem when you can cover it up with medication"?

I mean, I'm not saying that someone who is getting a leg amputated shouldn't get morphine, I'm saying that parents shouldn't use medicine to discipline their kids.

If a kid honestly has a problem, like you're saying, then I see no reason NOT to take medicine for it, as there's nothing better to do about it. I know some people who simply cannot concentrate on anything, and they take medication for it. That is not the same as a kid who can't behave so their parents give them medication.

Am I being clear enough, or would you like for me to elaborate more?

My philosophy isn't covering up a problem with medication, it's fixing the problem via medication. The problem isn't the underlying cause for the symptoms, it is the symptoms themselves. The medicine fixes the symptoms.

I'm not saying give Adderall or Ritalin for bad behavior. They fix AD[H]D. That is different from simple bad behavior. However, hypothetically speaking, if there was a medicine for curing bad behavior I'd be all for it. It does not cover up the porblem, it fixes the problem.

Right now the only fix for bed behavior (that I know of) is behavioral therapy. That, then, is what I would suggest for fixing bad behavior. For fixing AD[H]D, I'd be for AD[H]D medication.

And what of my anti-depressants analogy?

Say someone has a shitty life, and they're depressed by this. They take anti-depressants to be happy. Is this fixing the problem?

That is conditional. If the only problem is that they are depressed and if the anti-depressants make them happy, then problem solved. However, if the anti-depressants make them content with a life that is spiraling downwards then the anti-depressants cease being innocuous. I still think that behavioral therapy along with the anti-depressants can counteract the negative effects of the anti-depressants making the anti-depressants a viable option once again.

How is that conditional, MJ? If someone's life is fucked up and they take meds to cope with that, that's not right. Like I said, that's just covering up the problem.

Well, misdiagnoses is not restricted to AD[H]D. True, this is a real issue. However, seeing that Adderall and Ritalin are relatively harmless there's much more of a problem when misdiagnosed with some other condition and given a medicine that is harmful.

It's conditional on their situation. For instance, assume that my life is picture-perfect. I have a great girlfriend, enough money to pay for school, all A's, my parents are happy, everything is great. Yet I'm still depressed. Anti-depressants should do wonders for me. No behavioral therapy is needed, as my life is already fine. However, if anti-depressants make me content with deplorable living conditions then they certainly have a negative effect. In this case, behavioral therapy along with anti-depressants would be optimum.

I wouldn't consider covering up an unrelated problem that could seriously affect the rest of someone's life "harmless."

I'm not sure I'm following anymore.

I think I made the analogy clear enough that you would know that I was talking about someone who has a shitty life and is depressed. I even specified at the end that I'm not saying depression (such as the type you described above) doesn't exist, I'm just saying a majority of the people who take anti-depressants don't have that type of depression.

I'm saying the same with ADHD medications. If there is such a thing as ADHD, it's not as common as ADHD medication use.

And no, I don't think medication is "harmless" in either situation. If someone takes anti-depressants to "fix" their shitty situation, they're just covering the underlying problem. To this you suggest, someone should take both anti-depressants and behavioral therapy. Why would they be motivated to take behavioral therapy if they feel their life is fine, even if it isn't?

Giving an unruly sugar rushing kid ritalin to make them behave is not fixing the problem. If they DO have ADHD, that's fine. If they DON'T have ADHD, it's NOT harmless, because it's not going to fix their problem. It will make it look fixed on the surface, but you've still got an unruly sugar rushing kid, they're just drugged. If that problem is not dealt with PROPERLY, it could affect their future.

Well, that's why I gave examples of both. I stated that for someone whose only problem is that he is depressed then anti-depressants are fine.

For someone who is depressed because of deplorable living conditions, the anti-depressants still fix the depression. That is what they are meant to do, and that is it. They are not meant to motivate you to fix your lamentable life, they are meant to help you cope with it. In this case anti-depressants fix the depression but may exacerbate the other problem. This, then, is the prescribing physicians call. We assume that their education makes them better qualified than us to make that call. Of course, this assumption may be faulty, however that is the assumption that society works by.

It seems to me you don't really have a problem with the medicine itself, you have a problem with the physicians and the assumption that society makes.

I can't explain why those who are on anti-depressants seek out behavioral therapy. That said, I am positive that someone can. An overwhelming majority of those on anti-depressants also seek the counsel of a psychologist.

I never claimed that ADHD medicine fixed behavioral problems.

But if there was a medicine that could, would you really oppose it? Even if the effects only lasted while the kid was drugged up, and it didn't really fix what made him unruly, it seems good to me. I'm not saying that the medicine is the only thing you should give the kid and then neglect it. Of course you should try and make it to where the kid can coincide with society without medication, however if the behavior isn't fixable, isn't a life-time supply of medicine the next best thing? Does it not, after all, fix what we've been wanting to fix?

It's the same thing with AD[H]D medicine. It does not make you more adept at concentrating once your are off the medicine. It is a temporary fix. However, it gets you through the day. That is what the goal is here. Even with AD[H]D medication I would recommend behavioral therapy alongside. It would be great if we could "fix" the underlying cause, and in some cases this is possible. In most cases, however, that is an unrealistic goal.

In theory, if there were a pill that could fix all of our problems, I believe I would support it.

The problem with that, the same as with ADHD medication and anti-depressants, is people use them as an EASY fix. Why fix your shitty life if you can just take anti-depressants to do that for you? Why be a parent to your kid when you can have a pill do it for you? This is what I do not agree with, and this is how it is with a majority of the cases. This is seen in other places as well, such as the media. All of those "Moms Against BLAH BLAH" organizations and shit, where parents want everything in the world that isn't appropriate for kids to be censored or removed or what have you, instead of them doing their jobs and being PARENTS. A good example of this that I have readily available is the "Mothers Against Maddox" organization. You know who Maddox is, I assume. These mothers assembled to have his website shut down because they did not want him filling their kids heads full of "crap." They would rather do that than actually be parents and pay attention to what their kids are viewing online, perhaps blocking websites they don't want their kids viewing.

You're right, MJ, I don't think there's anything wrong with the medicines. I think it's wrong that people use these medicines to escape responsibility.

I was hoping the debate would reach this point. I just read the whole thing and agreed with most of what each of you had to say (sounds like it may not be possible, but it is).
Acceptance of responsibility is one of the biggest problems I see in society today. I'd elaborate right now, but I just had teeth pulled and am still kind of loopy from the anesthesia.

I'm going to have to side with KA on this one even though MJ makes some good points. I was diagnosed with ADHD and was on various drugs for many years culminating in being prescribed Effexor for depression. After about 6 months on Effexor I stopped taking all the drugs altogether. There is a short period (about a week) of pretty awful withdrawl but after that I have never felt better. Strange that I was raised in a family which was divided on the medicines approach and one parent was a minimalist and the other had no problem giving medicines. In my post-parental-care life I have found I enjoy the former approach and I have not been sick at least three years. I don't wash my hands unless I am in a situation where that kind of thing is socially unacceptable or unhealthy for others (i.e. cooking for my house, after pooping, going out to eat, shaking hands, etc.) and I feel that this likely strengthens my immunities to the pathogens in my immediate surroundings.

As for the ADHD, the condition is mental and the solution is mental as well. You have to learn to work with it and not suppress it with drugs because the drugs do not ONLY effect the ADHD condition and there are definitely other effects! My self-esteem was affected and my appetite was suppressed (which led to some strange belittling in school, further exacerbating my insecurities). When I was on the anti-depressants I realized that by actively focusing my attention (I suppose the method is similar in practice to Buddhism) I could, not ignore or suppress, channel the wild mind into a relatively constructive form. I still have trouble following social standards (this really only applies to school, I rarely study unless I am particularly worried and I still do quite well, and I tend to do my assignments the night before, or the minute before!, class because I cannot focus on them unless I absolutely need to). This doesn't really cause me any real trouble and it is only reflected in the attitudes of others around me.

I believe that ADHD is just a result of the over-restricted system that our kids have to endure these days. There are simply personality types that DO NOT FIT in accordance to the American (and other nations) norms. There are school out there which take alternate approaches to learning (you seriously cannot believe that a standardized educational system is going to work, mj) and they can show incredible improvement to the faculties (and "scores") of some (not all, obviously!) children. I think drugs should only be used as an absolute final resort and being more actively involved in your child's mind is a better way to help understand the "adverse" conditions that are present and then it is up to the parents to adjust the environments to try to work WITH the child's tendencies instead of forcing them to adapt which will certainly lead to a social (and no doubt financial) nightmare.

That's all I have to say at the moment but I am sure there is more kicking around. This is a good thread.

Wow, I had no idea you were batshit insane.


JK, I think we all knew.

I am by no means advocating that someone try and substitute pills in place of actual parenting because magic pills don't exist, however what is wrong with taking the easy way out when it works just as well as the alternative, and does not harm anyone?

RS, I am curious, if you believed that ADHD was a biological condition rather than a mental one would it change your opinion on whether or not medicine should be taken to resolve the problem?

Since we had some discussion on depression as well, this is an interesting read:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...1001172838.htm

Alright I didn't read this entire thread because their was alot to read but,

1. !K_A!, Some people are depressed for no reason at all, they have a fine life, a job, etc. but there is a chemical imbalance in their brain that makes them feel sad. Seritonin is the neurotransmitter that controls mood, in people that have this chemical imbalance, the neuron releases Seritonin into the synapse, and Receptor site of the next Neuron "absorbs" as much as possible. For some reason though, the channels of neuron do not hold all of the seritonin released, so when the re-uptake from the origonal neuron happens, it takes in to much, causing an imbalance between the neuron and the receptor site.

This is what the Anti-Depressents are for. They have a technical name of SSRI's which means Selective Seritonin Reputake Inhibitor. So, when they are on the medicine, it blocks some of the channels for the reuptake to take place making it so only some of the seritonin is re-absorbed, balancing out the chemicals. The left overs are then dissolved by enzymes.

I'm not a scientist so don't flame me for not knowing everything, but this is the general idea of what happens..

I understand that, Spector, and acknowledged it. However, I feel that the majority of people who take anti-depressants aren't in that category. Same with ADHD.

Well in that case, I agree with you ;)

What are you basing this off of, though? Personal experiences? It may just be that certain people you know flamboyantly display the fact that they are on antidepressants, and these stand out in your mind when making judgments like this. I think your best bet is to read some research journals on the topic and see what the medical community has to say about disparity between those who need the medication and those who take it haphazardly. It may not be as wide a rift as you believe.

I trust my personal experience more than the medical community. The people who make antidepressants, and make money for prescribing antidepressants, are part of the medical community.

It's the same as flu shots. The people who make them will most definately tell you that you should really really get one. They don't tell you that they're nearly ineffective at reducing flu-related illness and they've been possibly linked to the increase in autism in children.

Yes, I'm assuming. Most people I see who take anti-depressants are people who have shitty lives and can't cope with or fix their shitty lives, so they get a prescription to help.

I wish I had a prescription for ADD meds. How does an adult go about getting a prescription for that?

Say you can't concentrate at work, find your mind wandering and you can't do anything about it and it's affecting your ability to do your job.

Google. You should be able to find enough info on how to fake a doctor to think you have adhd even if you dont :p

Unless your doctor is House.

I love that show, seen every episode. House is a jackass, and he's smart, so it's a good show. I have a friend who gets 40 mg adderall and 20 mg adderall, which seemed a bit odd, but oh well.

I have seasons 1 and 2 on my computer. I've seen a few episodes on TV, and watched the pilot for season 1 last night.

Oddly, you just described my life, except it affects my ability to sleep as well.