ADD/ ADHD/ Meds

[anon]

[ This Message was edited by: KarenZ on 2003-10-17 08:56 ]

[Anonymous]

4 million plus kids "running on ritalin" is not a miracle, it is an American tragedy.  What is wrong with our society that we must impair the brains of children with psychotropic drugs as the answer to "helping" them be more efficient at home and in the classroom?  No where else in the world are so many children being drugged into compliance with the expectations of their parents and teachers.  America is becoming a toxic wasteland of junk food, junk therapy and junk parenting.  

Read what Doc Diller has to say about Generation Rx.  

http://www.docdiller.com

 :roll:

[Deborah]

Karen,
I respect you and your opinion, but at the risk of offending you, I must say your stance on ADD/Meds sounds a tad bit like a program parent. Are you a psych professional? I'm sure you are just presenting what you have heard as "fact".
Personally, I'd rather hear your personal experience with the drug than a broad generalization.

Yes, some kids have the "desired" effect from stimulants. But, there are less potentially dangerous options available.
There are kids who have experienced dramatic positive changes with simply a change in diet. Some are found to have a different learning style. Some have been found to have allergies. Some have been found to have bonefided medical problems that interfere with attention. Kids deserve the least harmful method of treatment. Sounds like what we say about programs !!

As I've said to program parents, demonstrate some tolerance for different opinions. Parents get to make their own decisions after reviewing many opinions and experiences. No one's attacking you personally.

This in response to your comment, "I do wish people would refrain from stating there is no such thing as ADD/ ADHD, and that parents are just not wanting to parent. So many parents won't get their kids the help they need because they'd herd someone make this statement, and don't want to be labeled as a 'bad' parent. So, the poor kid struggles threw school, feeling dumb, and waiting for the day they can walk away from the hell of the class room."

I wish those who say there is such a thing would present the proof or alter the way they speak about it. There are other ways to interpret behaviors and analyze what the child needs. There are many ways to alter one's brain chemistry. One major problem I think is rampant in the US is inadequate nutrition, lack of exercise, and excessive and unnatural stimulation. Not a good mixture. A good run can have an immediate effect on thinking and feeling.
Deborah

[Anonymous]

I can see where both Karen and Deborah are coming from. I was diagnosed with ADD when i was in 4th grade, im now a senior in high school. When i was young my mother didnt believe in giving me any medication or ritilin, so she gave me some herbal stuff which deffidently didnt work. I went on struggling until i was in 9th grade and i finally convinced her to at least let me try the ritilin and see how if it helped me. Let me tell you...it was a life saver for me! It calmed me so much, i always had this restless feeling whenever i was sitting down for more than 10-15 minutes at a time, i didnt feel like this when i was talking the ritilin.
But then again, inadequate nutrition and lack of exercise is a lot of the reason why many people struggle on focusing and thinking about one thing at a time, but if there is no such thing as ADD/ADHD then what was wrong with me all this time?

Brittany-

[Anonymous]

First of all, it bothers me that at least 2 proponents of this drug can not properly spell the word RITALIN.  Second, just because Ritalin works doesn't mean parents should view this drug as a magic bullet.  I mean, GAS-X works wonders to control unwanted bloating but so does changing one's diet.

 :rofl:

[Deborah]

>>But then again, inadequate nutrition and lack of exercise is a lot of the reason why many people struggle on focusing and thinking about one thing at a time, but if there is no such thing as ADD/ADHD then what was wrong with me all this time?

Brittany,
No anti-drug advocate denies a child may be having issues with focus and attention or behaviors that cause them problems in social settings.
The ones I know advocate looking at all aspect of the child's life and fulfilling any real needs that have gone unmet.

Here's a link to just one example of how one incredible woman deals with this issue in her Montessori classroom. My sons attended her school, as did their friend whose mother wanted him on drugs. I watched him be transformed over the years. The teacher couldn't change the utter chaos in his home, but provided consistency, stability and acceptance on a daily basis.

http://www.austinmontessori.org/donnabr ... apter9.htm

[Anonymous]

Deborah, you write: Personally, I'd rather hear your personal experience with the drug than a broad generalization.

You have herd my personal experience. Its what I base my opinions on.
Also, from working in an LD/BD class room, I saw a good cross section of kids, and was able to judge for myself if the med in question helped or hurt.

Anon, you write:  First of all, it bothers me that at least 2 proponents of this drug can not properly spell the word RITALIN. Second, just because Ritalin works doesn't mean parents should view this drug as a magic bullet. I mean, GAS-X works wonders to control unwanted bloating but so does changing one's diet.

Your attitude is exactly what I was trying to explain. You seem to be saying Brittany and I are not worth listening to, because we are so stupid we can't spell Ritalin in the conventional way.
I suspect if Ritilin had been available when I was in school, I might have been able to learn to spell. However, as it wasn't, I was thought to be retarded for the first 4 years of school. If not for a perceptive 4th grade teacher, my ability to Think may not have been discovered, and I might have gone much longer thinking I was retarded.

Back to Deb, you write: Yes, some kids have the "desired" effect from stimulants. But, there are less potentially dangerous options available.
There are kids who have experienced dramatic positive changes with simply a change in diet.

This is true about the diet change. I know. But it isn't always helpful. It depends on what the problem is - if its a food allergy, or just way to much sugar and fat in a kids diet - a change will help.
However, if its ADD, all the diet changes in the world won't help much. Some, maybe, but not enough to really make a big difference.
If (IF)it is ADD, then the drug does work. And it is extremely safe, if used appropriately.
As for the Program Parent thing - I can't imagine how I sound like a P. P by stating an opinion that goes against the grain of the majority : )
I don't mind that you hold your opinion, and I would strongly support your decision not to medicate your child. I just wish you and others wouldn't state your Opinion so strongly as fact - as their are many people unable to make the distinction, and who may not allow giving the med a try based on your opinion. In my opinion, this could deprive the child in question the opportunity to succeed and achieve in school.

Someone mentioned Loving our kids as they are - well of coarse! We love our kids very much even tho they may have all kinds of problems that make life a challenge. And because we love them, we do what we can to help with the challenges.

All I'm saying is if a child has this particular problem, the drug in question can help. I disapprove of this judgmental attitude towards parents who decide to give their struggling child this help. Once again, if ADD isn't the problem, the drug in question is not going to help! If it doesn?t help, then it is time to look for other answers, assuming the problem isn't obvious, like needing glasses, or sleep, or food.

You mention exercise - your absolutely right it can help a lot! And yet, we have schools doing away with recess. Kids growing up in neighborhoods where its not safe to go out and run around wild the way we did. People today fear even letting kids play alone in their own yards, and sadly, with good reason.
But again, IF the problem is ADD, exercise won't make any difference. Its a wild and disorganized way the brain functions in these kids. Its a brain chemistry situation that doesn?t respond to exercise the way some other disorders do.

Clearly we have to agree to disagree on this - and thats fine. I'm really not trying to flip your opinion. I'm just hoping to persuade you to be less judgmental of those who disagree.

[Anonymous]

Ritalin clearly helps some people-- and there are thousands of papers in the psychiatric literature, which compare it to placebo *and* to behavioral treatment and find it more effective.

What does that mean?  More people get better-- ie, do better in school and relationships-- on Ritalin than do when given behavioral treatments or an inactive medication.

The people who say Ritalin works are *not* just like program parents who say the program works.

The program parents have only their own personal experience to back their statements; the proponents of Ritalin have hundreds of peer-reviewed papers.  The opponents of Ritalin, however, are in the same situation as the program parents-- no data aside from anecdotes!!!

There is a reason that science frowns on anecdotes:  they cannot prove cause and effect.  Only controlled studies, comparing people who get the drug or intervention, to those who get placebo or a different intervention, can do that.

Why?  If I put my kid in a program, and he gets better, I may credit the program, but how do I know he wouldn't have gotten better if I left him alone or if I made him stand on his head for two years?  I don't.  It's impossible to say for sure.  But if we randomly assign 200 kids to the program, another 200 to be left alone, and another 200 to stand on their heads, and the program kids do best, then we know the program works.  Conversely, if the head-standers do best, we should set up a program that incorporates that.
But if the left-alone kids do best, we need to recognize that and look for interventions that improve on nature or just leave the kids alone!

Without a "left alone" group, you can't tell anything because naturally, most kids mature out of their problems.  There are dozens of studies which follow troubled kids over time that show this.  Therefore, you need controlled research to even begin the debate.

And sure there are problems with controlled research, too-- but these are nowhere near as severe as the biases that afflict anecdotes.  They are simply a higher standard of evidence, the highest one that we humans can achieve.

Further, arguing that ADD doesn't exist is like arguing that MS doesn't exist because there isn't a lab test for it.  Tell that to people who can't move or control their bowels anymore because their immune systems are attacking their nervous systems!!! ADD diagnoses stand up to the tests used for other psychiatric and neurological diagnoses-- but there are simply people out there who don't like the idea of it, unlike with MS.

Finally, this doesn't mean that you should put everyone on drugs or that drugs should be the first choice.  But if you have a diagnosed kid and everything else doesn't work, it's crazy to rule out drugs!

[Anonymous]

I have no experience with WWASP programs (thankfully), but I wound up here while researching them (I have a tendency to go on semi-random research binges when I run across topics that interest me). I do, however, have a whole lot of experience with medication for AD(H)D. I am seventeen years old (eighteen soon). I was diagnosed with ADD at the age of six. I currently take Concerta (essentially timed-release Ritalin), Zoloft, and, when it's necessary to supplement the Concerta, Ritalin. I have taken a ridiculous number of medications in the past (I'll name them as necessary). I am not personally affiliated with any psychiatric or pharmaceutical group. Why am I posting? Because it frustrates me to see stupid misconceptions tossed around about something that's been such a significant part of my life. Some of the people here seem to have made up their minds regardless of whatever else they might learn, but some might be at least willing to consider other possibilities.
I got by well enough in preschool and kindergarten. Then I hit first grade, and due to my stubbornness and curiosity combined with a bad teacher, I became infamous for my disruptive behavior. Eventually, my parents took me to be evaluated by a whole battery of psychiatrists, psychologists, and therapists. I even went to a hospital to have various neurological and physiological tests conducted. This wasn't a matter of a principal telling an irresponsible parent, "Hey, your kid's being a pain in the ass--pop her some pills so we don't have to deal with her crap." In fact, much of my history with the public education system has been one of struggling to get them to acknowledge my troubles as something more than stubbornness and laziness. (Not that I haven't been stubborn and lazy at times, of course.)
On advice from one of my constantly rotating battery of psychosomethings, my parents tried giving me coffee to see if the caffeine would help me focus. It wasn't enough. So eventually they did, in fact, give me Ritalin. It worked. It didn't solve everything (no silver bullets here), but that's another story: the key point is that it worked. I did not get addicted. When we (that is, my parents and I) decided that Ritalin was no longer helping me enough to justify my continued use of it, we sought professional help on other alternatives. So for a while I took Adderall instead, and that worked well into puberty. Eventually, after an epic saga of much attempting to find The Perfect Drug That Would Solve Everything, I wound up on my current medications. Ritalin works, so long as I don't expect it to solve everything. (I hear it solves everything for some people, which is great, but that's not the case for me.)
The fact that some medications have helped me doesn't mean I happily swallow whatever pill my psychiatrist wants to feed me. I've had bad experiences with medication as well. I've learned to be firm with psychiatrists. I didn't always know how to do this, though. "So in summary, yeah, I've got some mood swings, but what really troubles me is the ADD and the depression." "I'd like you to try a mood stabilizer." "That doesn't sound good. Besides, I'm fine with the mood swings, I can deal with them--" "I want to see how you react to the mood stabilizer." The mood stabilizer was a Bad Idea, to say the least; I'd worried that it would eliminate my "highs" and worsen my "lows," and it did exactly that. I later found out that it was actually an antipsychotic that was frequently prescribed as a mood stabilizer. I also learned that, while the psychiatrists had been feeding me a barrage of shiny new antidepressants, all I needed on that front was Zoloft, which does wonders for my ability to control my own thoughts.
So no, not all medication is good. When a psychiatrist recommends something, research it, demand more information, firmly reject it if you think it would do you more harm than good--but don't reject it just because Drugs Are Bad, No Matter What. Think a specialized diet would do an ADD kid good? By all means try it out, but if it doesn't work, at least consider trying Ritalin or Adderall. Put whatever effort is necessary into finding psychiatrists and other doctors who know what the hell they're talking about and are willing to work with every child as an individual rather than as a blank sheet to stamp with their biases about treatment. That's the most important bit, really. Do what works best for the kid, even if it means setting aside cherished biases first.
--Annwyd

[Anonymous]

So far, I think Deborah's original post (as copied below) is holding more water than the arguments made by the ADD/ADHD proponents. But then again, maybe I'm suffering from some kind of disease that afflicts millions of adults who grew up without taking Ritalin, Adderal, Concerta and/or my Flintstone Vitamins!! Seriously folks, medicating kids with mind-altering drugs is BIG BUSINESS and getting bigger every day.  Just look at the ads for Concerta now being soft-pedaled in women's magazines, among other consumer outlets, including television, if I am not mistaken.

Sent: Sunday, June 01, 2003 4:43 PM
Subject: ADHD and the Meaning of Evidence

ADHD and the Meaning of Evidence
Barry Turner. BA MPhil.

There are some people that are denying that Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder exists. They are accused of being irresponsible, causing the condition to be underdiagnosed and even causing the sufferers of this disease to "unwittingly self medicate with illegal drugs or alcohol". If it were not for the fact that the explosion in ADHD diagnosis and treatment with stimulants such as Ritalin (Methylphenidate) represents the greatest medical catastrophe
since Thalidomide these statements would be laughable.

Do the makers of such statements really believe that the millions taking Ecstasy (MDMA), and other illegal substances that are closely related to Ritalin (methylphenidate), at thousands of night-clubs every weekend, are "self medicating" because they have not been "properly diagnosed". How can a "medical scientist" say that a "disease" is underdiagnosed (based on what
data?)

There is absolutely no reason why those opposed to the myth of ADHD as a disease need to justify that position. The matter is clear. It is for those who maintain the position that ADHD is a disease to adduce evidence of it. That evidence must be in the form of data collected in experimental conditions that can be validated by objective repeat studies.

Evidence is made up of three elements. The autoptic evidence which relates to material or physical evidence such as chemical residues or fingerprints. Direct evidence, which is that, proposed by a witness or an expert, and
circumstantial evidence, the weakest form of all. What do the proponents of ADHD have in the way of evidence from these sources?

Autoptic evidence is perceived by the senses and is commonly called 'real' evidence. In disease this evidence is always present. In carcinomas biopsies will reveal evidence of cell mutation. In cardiovascular disease necrotic muscle tissue, arterial plaques or calcified arteries can be observed. In infectious diseases the pathogens causing the infections can be collected and
identified. The evidence is there for all medical professionals to see. Not so with ADHD.

Direct evidence is that which an eyewitness or expert describes from their own first hand observations. What do the experts say?

ADHD may be (may be?) genetic¦ no one has extended this to its logical and necessary conclusion by identifying which chromosome has this defective gene and why the defect is there. Blue eyes incidentally are genetically determined
does that make them a disease?

ADHD may be due (again) to biochemical imbalance¦Not one piece of evidence exists to indicate this. Indeed where biochemical imbalances are suggested there is again a signal lack of empirical evidence to support the theory.
(Empirical means that it can be repeated, tested, measured, verified.)

ADHD may be (and again) hereditary¦ Just as in quoting spurious "genetics" this is meaningless at best and deliberately misleading at worst. Criminal behavior is also hereditary, criminal fathers more often than not are followed by criminal sons (and daughters) The behavior is learned and just as musical parents produce musical children and enthusiastic sports loving parents produce sporting offspring this is no indicator of genetics or hereditary cause. It
should be noted that Chinese children have a propensity to grow up speaking Chinese if they grow up in China. Those that have been adopted by western parents and taken to America for instance have not as yet spontaneously begun to speak Chinese because it is hereditary or genetic for them to do so. Language like behavior is learned.

What about the weakest form of evidence, circumstantial. Ah, well here at last the ADHD proponents have something. Children misbehave and run about wildly, they are defiant and get bored easily. Er, yes they always have done. The
circumstances of this "aberrant" behavior suggest to these ADHD observers that something is wrong, the child must be "ill". It perhaps should be put to them that the children are fine, it is they that are suffering from "Observational Inaccuracy and Distortion Disorder"

What about the famous suggestion that these children have "different" or smaller brains? Well the studies that came up with that theory look good until you spend five minutes reading them. After five minutes the reader will notice that the "research cohort" is in fact mixed, some children on medication, some not. Some of the "normal" children are several years older than those with the smaller brains. The statistics invite the well known scientific and legal observation "correlates are not causes". This is the kind of science that concludes that oranges are different to avocados based on the fact that oranges are less green than avocados. How much more enlightened these "scientists"
would become if they actually tasted the fruit.

The language of the ADHD lobby is a wonderful indicator of how exact the science is that created it. "ADHD may be¦" "ADHD is probably¦" "Studies indicate¦" "Scientists believe...". Not one piece of evidence exists to
categorically place this condition in any classification of diseases.

The three kinds of evidence mentioned above are the categories of legal evidence. They are the material that decides the case for or against, guilty or not guilty. There is one that has been missed out.

Hearsay evidence is that which is reported second or third hand. Its value to probandum (actual proof) is severely limited as it cannot be tested by the normal methods employed to examine the other kinds of tangible evidence. The person that relates it does not know the facts, only the facts as they were reported to them. Just like the Connors rating for ADHD. Little Johnny is
hyperactive says the teacher. Give him Ritalin says the doctor. Little Jimmy can't concentrate on his schoolwork says the teacher. Give him Adderal says the doctor. Little Sally misbehaves in class says the teacher. Give her Concerta says the doctor. How many doctors prescribe insulin to patients because their neighbour reports that they have seen them drinking lots of water and heard that their feet often tingle?

If in the future the proponents of ADHD find themselves indicted for inflicting this scourge onto the world they will surely demand that their accusers bring strong evidence before they are convicted. Rest assured they would complain
about rights abuses if they were convicted on circumstantial and hearsay evidence. What an irony that such poor evidence is sufficient to convince them they are right now, so right in fact that on hearsay and circumstantial evidence alone they will give addictive and dangerous medicines to children some of whom are barely out of infancy

Those of us who oppose this outrageous abuse of medical science do not need to justify our position. We do not need to produce evidence that ADHD does NOT exist any more than we need to produce evidence that Santa Claus does not exist. The proponents need to answer these questions.

§ What is the etiology of ADHD?
§ Where is the hard evidence? (objective, scientific and empirically validated)
§ If it is actually a disease, why is no one looking for a CURE?

In the lack of coherent answers to these questions ADHD is a belief system only, like believing in fairies or Santa Claus, not a disease or any other kind of medical condition.

The author is a Lecturer in Legal Studies in Forensic Science in the Department of Biological Sciences, University of Lincoln, Criminal Litigator and Mental Health Law Consultant



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

[Antigen]

Hi Ann,
Thanks for posting. Lots to think about there.

I'll tell you that I have a very personal, anectdotal reason for being very skeptical of shrinks with pills.

When I entered first grade, I got the diagnosis and so did my favorite 6 or so playmates.

I and one other kid's parents passed on the ritalin, the others went along. I and the other kid remained alternately bored, high strung, occasionally brilliant and fully engaged. He and I both wound up winning a trip to Sea Camp as a reward for tackling a seriously challenging marine biology program in 5th grade.

The other 4 just sort of sat and drooled, followed instruction but often didn't laugh at jokes or really engage on a social level at all.

So Ritalin 'helped' them to become more compliant students. But I'm not sure they got the better end of the deal.

And I sounds to me asif you and I share exactly the same brand of skepticism. Every time I deal with any kind of medical professional they re-enforce my thesis that you really can't place all the responsibility on them and we shouldn't expect it of them. We have to, if we want good health, take personal responsibility for our healthcare decisions.

So.... why the need for prescription and why the criminal status for certain of those drugs? If you've looked into pharmacology, and it's clear that you've been doing your fair share of that, then you know that most pharmacological drugs are just synthetic versions of their illegal counter-parts.

Do you think we'd all be better off if we'd never started the rumor that professionals can and should make all of our healthcare decisions?

Madness takes its toll.  Please have exact change.
--Anonymous

[Deborah]

>>However, if its ADD, all the diet changes in the world won't help much. Some, maybe, but not enough to really make a big difference.
If (IF)it is ADD, then the drug does work. And it is extremely safe, if used appropriately.

You might benefit from speaking to parents whose kids have died, and took the drugs appropriately. I guess the "window of loss" theory applies here as well. Hey atleast they were "successful" in school for a few years.

>>As for the Program Parent thing - I can't imagine how I sound like a P. P by stating an opinion that goes against the grain of the majority : )

Karen, your opinion and voice is very much a part of the majority, in case you haven't noticed. My voice is absolutely in the minority and why I speak at every opportunity. Parents have a RIGHT to evaluate all sides of an issue before deciding. Sorry you were humiliated for not being "smart"... and that no one helped you learn how not to react to that... and that you (and millions of others) were part of a system of education that allows such hurtful behavior and doesn't meet the needs of all students. Life could've been different for you without the "benefit" of Ritalin.
Re: sounding like a program parent. Step back a moment and read your comments. You started a new thread to ensure everyone read your defensive post. That's how I perceived it. You weren't presenting your opinion, you were preaching and prostelitizing, imho. I couldn't imagine why you had such a vested interest either way. I think I understand now. FYI, I was called stupid. I made straight As until high school. I quit in the 10th grade, got my GED and later attended college. I had a 4.0 GPA, but still fought off the internal voice that reminded me, "you're still stupid". There are sooo many options for kids who don't do well in a system that is flawed in design because it only teaches to a percentage of the students. The problem is the ed system, not the kids.

>>I don't mind that you hold your opinion, and I would strongly support your decision not to medicate your child. I just wish you and others wouldn't state your Opinion so strongly as fact - as their are many people unable to make the distinction, and who may not allow giving the med a try based on your opinion.

Jeeezzzz, would you read this a few times. You don't mind that I hold my opinion? You wish I "wouldn't state my opinion so strongly as fact= as there are many people unable to make the distinction". Give me a break Karen. You have missed the point completely. The point being, your opinion (based on what you have read) is not fact. Go back to my original post and take the challenge I presented. Post the emperical evidence. Otherwise, shouldn't you take your own advice. Tell the truth. ADD is not genetic or hereditary. Truth is they don't know what "causes" it. But by accident, discovered that 'hyperactive' kids seem to slow down when given stimulants that are equivalent to cocaine. There are no long term studies to prove its safety, therefore one's child will basically be a guinea pig. But, the drug might possibly work in terms of helping one fit it and be liked and do better in school.

>>But again, IF the problem is ADD, exercise won't make any difference. Its a wild and disorganized way the brain functions in these kids. Its a brain chemistry situation that doesn?t respond to exercise the way some other disorders do.

Karen, back up these statements. It is my understanding that many things affect brain chemistry. Do you know a good cry can change one's brain chemistry and improve attention, almost immediately?
Brain chemistry/emotional distress is like the chicken and the egg. It's a catch 22, one feeding the other. The method you support is one of dependence on drugs to alter brain chemistry, rather than one of digging for the real issues below the "symptoms" and interrupting the cycle. All aspects of the child's life should be examined to find the source. Change the factors that are negatively influencing brain chemistry and you see "symptoms" disappear.

I don't recall being judgmental toward parents. But, I'll bet you 10 - 1 the majority of parents who go this route are coerced by schools or psych professionals and/or do not know alternatives exist. Some know but feel its too much trouble to search for the real causes.  Most advocates are about education and feel it is unacceptable for parents to be coerced or to risk losing their children if they don't persue drugs. THAT is the reality in most states. Parents don't really have an choice !! (Think the drug makers have anything to do with this policy?)  Drug your child or face loosing him or her to CPS. I have lots of judgment about that. Its unacceptable. Period.
Deborah

[Anonymous]

What scares me about these kinds of drugs being prescribed to young children is the fact that behavior modification comes in a pill.  And if that doesn't do the trick, there are plenty of program referral services out there just waiting for the opportunity to sell parents on the idea of controlling or changing the behavior of their kids by "submerging" them in a controlled environment.  What the hell is going on in this country that has parents and educators treating kids like adults and adults like kids?  ZERO TOLERANCE is not working in the home, school or community.  When will Americans wake up from this Stefordish nightmare? Where are the think tanks that are supposed to be developing public policy?  Are they out-to-lunch too?  Sure looks that way.  

 ::puke::

[anon]

[ This Message was edited by: KarenZ on 2003-10-17 09:01 ]

[Anonymous]

Karen, you might want to log on to this website for a dose of reality. While I do not doubt your sincerity in arguing your point of view, it's clear you have not done your homework.  

http://www.ritalindeaths.com