ADD/ ADHD/ Meds

[Anonymous]

My apologies, the correct link is

http://www.ritalindeath.com

 :wink:

[Anonymous]

Read about Stephanie's case, the little girl whose visions of angels proved tragically all too real.  

http://www.ritalindeath.com/stephanie.htm

[Anonymous]

There's another side to that "ritalin death" story-- which is that no other expert agreed with the medical examiner who claimed that the kid died from Ritalin.  I believe there may have been a court case related to this in which this came out and which did not find Ritalin responsible for the death.

Further, the study which supposedly showed that kids on Ritalin had twice the risk of drug abuse of those who were left unmedicated was confounded by the fact that when the study was conducted, only the kids with the most extreme cases were put on medications.  More recent studies, in which kids of comparable severity were compared on drug v. non-drug therapies found that actually, Ritalin cut the risk of later drug abuse by 50%.

Which stands to reason because many people with ADD use illegal drugs to medicate themselves-- but of course, illegal drugs have the disadvantage of being impure, expensive, less effective and, well, illegal!

These issues are complicated-- but what I don't get is why people think that it has to be so black and white-- ie, Ritalin = evil or Ritalin = fabulous.  The data shows it helps some people, it helps more than any non-drug intervention researched so far.

That doesn't mean it helps everyone, that doesn't mean it doesn't have side effects, that doesn't mean it can't harm anyone.  

But the number of deaths given the number of annual prescriptions over the number of years that it has been prescribed show that it has a pretty damn good safety record.  

And this notion that Ritalin makes people "compliant" or "brainwashed" is just ludicrous.  For those for whom it works, it allows them *the choice* to behave better by allowing them to focus more.  It doesn't *force* them to do this-- hence all the kids on Ritalin who still misbehave, it just gives them the option of becoming more responsible.  For people with ADD without the drug, the distractions are so compelling, they feel forced to respond to them-- Ritalin gives them the choice to say "No, I want to learn"

Of course, if you put someone on the wrong drug or the wrong dose, they may have side effects-- and may feel numb or drugged or unresponsive-- but that's not the effect that anyone responsible using medications seeks.

[Anonymous]

Tom Hartmann has a series of books that I read when my son was diagnosed with ADD.  Found out that I'm an adult with ADD.

A little history: When my son's teachers said that he "must" be on medication to return to school, I reluctantly took him to a psychiatrist, who spent all of 15 minutes talking with us and asking questions and wrote a prescription for Adderall and Paxil.  Worked great for about 2 weeks, then it was back to square one.  During that year he began to self-medicate (weed and meth) and was still taking the "legal" meds.  His behavior was out of control as was mine by that time.  When a drug test showed he was using, he was weaned off the legal meds - I was with him as much as possible, however I am a single mom and had to pay the bills, so I wasn't home during the day.  I had him in drug rehab, counseling, staying with relatives, and started working part time when he came home...by the end of the summer his anger had escalated, and nothing, I mean NOTHING helped.  His self medicating did not work.  The Adderall did not work.  

What worked for him was being in a long term residential therapy program.  He learned to work with vs. against his ADD.  He is no longer an angry and self-destructive young man. He graduated high school with a 3.8 gpa at 18 (2 years after leaving the RTC.) What he learned was to see his life differently.  We grew up with strong negative feelings about ourselves.  We both learned to change our perception.  The RTC used much of the same thinking as Tom Hartmann in his books.  He has not been on meds in almost 4 years.  In fact, his RTC prefers this approach to meds, though if a child must be on meds, then they will do this (bi-polar is one.)  ADD doesn't just go away, so having my son on meds to mask the symptoms the rest of his life was not an option.  

Many on this forum are against the WWASP programs.  It's not for everyone, but for us, Cross Creek Center's therapist and staff created a place for us to heal. He experienced emotional abuse from his public school teachers, not from them.  Is his life perfect, no.(Is anyone's?)  Is he drug free,yes. The majority of his peers are also successful.  It takes more than meds to heal ADD. (There is no "cure.") It takes more than loving positive parenting to heal from it.  It takes more than a good diet and exercise to heal it.  He learned he is a good person and loves every part of himself, especially the ADD. There is no quick fix in healing ADD - meds only work for those lucky few.

Are the other WWASP programs like Cross Creek?  Don't know - no experience of the results, but I do know they provided exactly what we needed.  Asking for help is not a bad (parent) thing.  The price for not asking for help was much higher.

[Deborah]

Ritalin May Cause Brain Change in Children
Reuters
Monday, November 12, 2001; Page A08

The stimulant Ritalin, a drug used to help children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, may cause long-term changes in the
brain, researchers reported yesterday.

The changes look similar to those seen with other stimulants such as amphetamine and cocaine, at least in rats, the team at the University of Buffalo found.

"Clinicians consider Ritalin to be short-acting," Joan Baizer, a professor of physiology and biophysics who led the study, said in a
statement.

"When the active dose has worked its way through the system, they consider it 'all gone.' Our research with gene expression in an animal model suggests that it has the potential for causing long-lasting changes in brain cell structure and function."

But Baizer said that Ritalin, known generically as methylphenidate, probably is not addictive in the way drugs of abuse are if it is used properly.

"Children have been given Ritalin daily for many years, and it is extremely effective and beneficial, but it's not quite as simple as a short-acting drug," she said. "We need to look at it more closely."

High doses of amphetamine and cocaine have been found to switch on genes known as "immediate early genes" in brain cells. One of the genes, called c-fos, has been linked with addiction when it is activated in certain parts of the brain.

The researchers gave rat pups sweetened milk carrying methylphenidate in comparable doses and at similar times to what a child would get. C-fos genes were activated in their brains in a pattern similar to that seen in cocaine and amphetamine use, the researchers told a meeting of the Society for Neuroscience in San Diego.

"These data do suggest that there are effects of Ritalin on cell function that outlast the short term, and we should sort that out," Baizer said.

She said perhaps a gene chip -- a microarray -- could be used to see just which genes are turned on and off by methylphenidate.

© 2001 The Washington Post Company

[FaceKhan]

To this day I have never heard from  positive review of a kid's experience at WWASP told by an adult former student/client/inmate on any board. It is always some kid who just got out of the program and is possibly under threat of being sent back or more often a parent who insists that their kid is now a balanced successful person thanks to WWASP.

I will believe it when I see it. All I have seen so far are the accounts of kids who were beaten, tortured, humiliated, starved, and even raped while under WWASP's care.

[Deborah]

Here we go, another prime example of how the drug lords are medicalizing normal characteristics of children. If they can't hook them with fraudulent mental disorders, they'll go after physical characteristics, such as stature.

FDA Approves Wider Use of Growth Hormone
By Marc Kaufman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, July 26, 2003; Page A12

The use of human growth hormone to treat children who are healthy but unusually short was approved yesterday by the Food and Drug Administration
-- the first time that the agency has embraced use of the controversial drug to treat UNEXPLAINED shortness.

To advocates of the approval, it offers new possibilities for very small children who suffer from a growth disorder. But critics have attacked the expanded use as a misguided effort to turn a cosmetic or social problem into a medical one.

The FDA based its decision on studies that found the biosynthesized hormone Humatrope added between one and three inches in height to children who took it for four to six years, and that there were no SIGNIFICANT health risks
for the children.

The drug has been available since the late 1980s, but it had been approved by the FDA only for shortness caused by specific diseases and syndromes. The new approval is for shortness -- defined as an adult height of less than 5 feet 3 inches for men and 4 feet 11 inches for women -- without a known cause.
[Must we all fit in the average catagory? Must we have a pasturized, homogenous society? What happens in a few decades when short people are tallere? Those who were once considered normal or average may suddendly fall into the short catagory because the observable standard has changed.]

The approval could significantly increase the number of children who receive the expensive treatment, which doctors say can cost $30,000 to $40,000 a year, because it will put pressure on insurance companies to cover it. The drug's manufacturer says it would cost less.

But the FDA said that the maker of Humatrope, Eli Lilly & Co., has agreed not to advertise it directly to consumers; that can greatly increase demand for a medication. The company estimates that 400,000 children would fit the new category, but that only about 10 percent will get treatment.
[400,000 x $35,000= $14,000,000,000 per year or $1,400,000,000 for 10%. So some short kids can have the "opportunity" to possibly gain an inch or two?]

The medical profession is split on whether expanding the use of human growth hormone is good.

"We really don't have enough information to know how effective it will be and how widely it should be used," said Naomi D. Neufeld, a Los Angeles
pediatric endocrinologist who is a board member of the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists.

"Some doctors think it can be very helpful, but we also have a small but very loud group that says, 'Don't do it.' " she said. "Clearly, this is a treatment that has to be considered on a case-by-case basis and that involves a major family decision."

She said that doctors are debating whether it makes sense to recommend the medication when it costs so much and has LIMITED effect. [No mention of possible side effects]

But a spokeswoman for Eli Lilly, Judy Kay Moore,  :silly:  said the new approval will bring relief to thousands of small children. "These kids have a growth disorder, just like the ones who have been getting Humatrope for years," she said. "The difference is simply that the origins of their growth disorders ARE NOT NOW KNOWN. But that shouldn't keep them from getting treatment."

The FDA decision draws on the results of two studies that followed children who were unusually short for unknown reasons, for four years and six years.

The first group received injections three times weekly, and the second group received LARGER DOSES SIX TIMES A WEEK until they reached adult height. The studies found that the final height of the children exceeded what had been PREDICTED without the drug in a majority of patients, and by as much as four inches in some of those in the second study.
[Can one accurately predict the adult height of a child? No. Maybe within an "inch or two"...about what the drug is reported to sometimes acheive.]

The FDA said the drug should be used for only the shortest 1.2 percent of children. The agency said that "short stature" -- shortness without a clear
medical reason to explain it -- is a defined condition, but some do not believe it is a necessarily treatable condition.

University of Pennsylvania ethicist Arthur L. Caplan said he was concerned about the FDA approval, because "we will start to treat the normal as a disease."

"I think it's dangerous when you take people who are normally short and say there is something wrong with them," he said.

"Whenever you take people on the low end of a distribution curve and say they have a disorder, you're starting down a slippery slope."

The FDA decision followed the recommendation of an advisory panel last month that voted 8 to 2 in favor of approving the new usage of the drug. The
chairman of the panel, Glenn Braunstein of Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles, said the panel concluded that the drug produced a usually SMALL BUT DISCERNABLE increase in height in MOST patients, and did not APPEAR TO cause other health problems.

"If a family thinks this will help their child, we concluded they should have the right to use it," Braunstein said. "But it has to be a really
considered and informed consent, because the cost is great and the improvement will probably be limited."

Braunstein also said that he did not think the drug should be covered by government medical programs or insurance companies unless there is a growth disorder with an identifiable cause. "There will always be someone in the
shortest group of a population."
*****************************

Should short children/people scream discrimination? Why don't they make tallness a disorder? Anyone over 6 feet should take anti-growth hormone.  :lol:

******************************

http://blueprint.bluecrossmn.com/topic/hgh
No one has thoroughly studied the long-term -- or even short-term -- side effects of taking human growth hormone for non-medical reasons. But there's reason to suspect trouble. People who naturally produce too much of the hormone or have received medical treatment for growth failure often develop abnormal hearts, bones, and nerves, and are particularly likely to suffer from osteoporosis, heart failure, and other diseases. Sports medicine researchers at the University of Massachusetts, among other experts, suspect that long-term use of supplemental HGH could have similar consequences.

http://www.niddk.nih.gov/health/endo/pu ... /alert.htm
People who have been treated with hGH may be at risk of adrenal crisis, a preventable condition that can kill them. These deaths can be prevented if patients and their families recognize the condition and treat it right away. Adrenal crisis is a medical emergency. Know the symptoms and how to adjust your medication when you are ill. Taking these precautions can save your life.

http://www.niddk.nih.gov/health/endo/pu ... date.htm#1
Of about 7,700 Americans who received NHPP hGH, 26 people have gotten CJD. The two things that seem to be connected with getting CJD are:
How long a person has been treated with hGH: The average treatment time with hGH was 3 years. People who got CJD typically were treated with hGH for about 9 years.
When a person was treated with hGH: All the people who got CJD had been given hGH before 1977.
Overall, 1 in about 300 people treated with hGH got CJD. All CJD patients received some hGH before 1977. Of those treated before 1977, 1 in 104 got CJD.

In 1977, the NHPP changed the way it made hGH. Scientists added a new purification step that greatly reduced and may have removed the risk of CJD. So far, no patient who started hGH after 1977 has become ill with CJD. Since CJD takes so long to develop, we still don't know for sure that those who started treatment after 1977 are safe.

The longest reported time from the start of hGH treatment to first signs of CJD is 33 years in U.S. patients. One person in Holland got CJD attributed to hGH 38 years after a very brief use of hGH. This is the longest incubation period on record.

http://www.ninds.nih.gov/health_and_med ... htm#whatis

Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD) is a rare, degenerative, invariably fatal brain disorder.
There is no treatment that can cure or control CJD.
****************************

Well, that's about all I need to read on the subject. They certainly are willing to roll the dice with other people's children.
And back to the main point, drug companies are about making humans guinea pigs, profit for themselves and stockholders. The "window of loss" is acceptable, even for "short stature". In my system of judgment, it is criminal to subject children to dangerous drugs when safe alternative exist. And for those who are short because their genes dictated shortness, well they could be best helped by learning to accept their stature.
Deborah

[anon]

[ This Message was edited by: KarenZ on 2003-10-17 09:02 ]

[Deborah]

A New ADHD Drug

Big News: On November 27, 2002, the US Food and Drug Administration
(FDA) approved Strattera (atomoxetine HCL), a new non-stimulant medicine for ADHD. This is the first new type of drug to be approved for ADHD in almost 30 years. Unlike Ritalin, this drug will not be a controlled substance. Studies suggest that the abuse potential is lower, and that the new medicine does not cause sleep problems in
children. It works by enhancing levels of the neurotransmitter norepinephrine (it is a selective norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor).
I expect this drug will be a huge seller. Millions of children will probably receive this drug. Its manufacturers hope it will be the
first line treatment for ADHD. Strattera may indeed prove to be gentler and more effective than its predecessors. Nevertheless, it is
wise to keep in mind that to date, studies have only been done in a few thousand children, showing effectiveness for only 9 weeks, and
safety for only 1 year.

We do know that the drug increases both heart rate and blood pressure in children.

We also know that in the short-term studies (less than 9 weeks) the children on Strattera lost weight, while their peers were gaining. In
the longer studies, children on Strattera fell on both their weight and their height growth curves. No one knows whether or not there will be any effect on adult height -- or on the adult brain, or GI tract, or sexual organs, or any organ.
[Deborah: Hey, if the drug causes them to be SHORT, they can take hGH]

In children, the most common side effects are (occurring in at least one in twenty children and at at least twice the rate of those taking
placebo): indigestion, nausea, vomiting, fatigue, decreased appetite, dizziness, and mood swings. Sometimes it is easier to uncover side effects in adults. In adult studies, the most common side effects are (occurring in at least one in twenty adults and at at least twice the rate of those taking placebo): constipation, dry mouth, nausea,
decreased appetite, dizziness, insomnia, decreased libido, ejaculatory problems, impotence, :scared:

I am very glad that a new drug, and a new class of drug, is available. I am grateful for the brilliant thinking and the commitment to research and development that enabled its introduction.
Strattera may prove to be a great benefit to many children. I greet its arrival with caution, however, until more is known.

Alan Greene MD FAAP  
December 06, 2002
http://www.drgreene.com/21_1246.html
 :skull:  :skull:  :skull:  :skull:  

Opinion:
Per the article, this drug Strattera is an SSRI, which is a psychotropic drug, and I believe it has all the attendant problems that other drugs have in its class (SNRIs).  Just from the side effects listed, I consider it a poison, and would not recommend it for anyone.  Instead of fooling around with the brain reuptake mechanisms, which can and does affect many known or unknown functions in the body, why not just use amino acids, and give the brain some extra nutrition.  Julia Ross covers exactly how to do this in her
book, The Mood Cure.  She spoke at our last conference recently (put on by Safe Harbor/ AlternativeMentalHealth.com).  Safe Harbor and Ross are planning workshops for professionals to train them in this safe and effective technique.  In the meantime, if you want to buy the book, please call me at 818-563-2392.
Denise Marhoefer
The Defense Foundation for children USA
***************************************

http://www.ritalindeath.com/board/?topic=topic1
4 Feb 2003
I have just today stumbled on to your web site and the story of Matthew. I am deeply sadden by the tragedy. I have a son who also is on a stimulant. I am concerned and was looking forward to the release of Strattera as a replacement for the stimulants. In the first of the story you state Eli Lilly is to use children as Guinea pigs (I am assuming for the testing of Strattera) although you did not give any more insight on Strattera as to its danger of use. Is they something you know about Strattera that Eli Lilly is not telling us. Please let me know.  
 
Hello C, To be honest with you I have not even looked into the chemical make up the new drug yet. I heard in the news that the drug company is going to start testing the new drug on children this month 2003. I just hope that parents are informed that when they allow their child to be put on this new experimental drug (Strattera), their child is being used very much, in the same way lab rats are used by drug companies.  

Thanks for the input L, I have been following the progress of atomoxtine (Strattera) for about six months or so, hoping to be able to reduce the amount of meds my son takes. He is has been diagnosed Asperger's Syndrome (part of the Autistic Spectrum) after a long and difficult road. (several diagnoses later, adhd and bipolar ) I have looked at the prescribing info at:(http://www.strattera.com/cnt_common/info_pi.html) and it sounds to be promising for reducing stimulants in children.. Keep me posted if you find anything new. Thanks again. C
 
C, my two cents....securing an independant life for your child's future lies in education. With a child that has any type of special needs, practical nursing to teach a child to take care of himself or herself is the best medicine you can give a child. Eili Lilly has not been completely honest with the American people, but money seems to get around that. I think Larry is exactly right about the clinical trial aspect of the marketing of the drugs.  
 
C, Eli Lilly's record has been poor as far as presenting to the public honestly and straightforwardly. With Prozac, the clinical trials were manipulated and we are now finding that suicidal ideation and violent behavior are associated with this drug. With Straterra, it appears that Lilly is attempting to get in on the market of ADHD drugs and we should hold their practices as suspect. Their stock prices went up dramatically just at the news of the testing of this new drug. On a side note, I noticed that you stated your child has been diagnosed with Asperger's Syndrome. I have worked as a Behavioral Specialist/ Therapist for children and adolescents with a focus on children diagnosed with autism spectrum disorders. You may review my essay, "Entering Their Imaginative World" as well as some other resources that you may find valuable at http://www.geocities.com/stnektarios Dan L. Edmunds, MA  
 
I found the information about Eli Lily's stock going up recently very interesting to say the least, and I am watching my local CHADD chapter very cloesely now. If you learn anything else new please share the information.  
 
Here's what I find incredibly scary about Strattera. One of the side effects listed for adults is sexual dysfunction (impotence, decreased labido, ejaculation problems) yet this drug is so new that we do not yet know the long-term affects of this drug in children whose sexual organs are still developing. Their longest clinical trial for FDA submission only lasted 10 weeks. And please, someone, tell me how Eli Lilly and Company got this drug pushed through the FDA hoops so quickly.  
 
My son has ben on Starttera for 1 week. He has been sleping so much that it was scaring me. I kept checking on him to make sure he was OK. Yesterday I had to pick him up from school because he was so sick in his stomache. During the night he threw up a number of times. He had to stay home form school today. He is still very tired and nauseated. I took him off the medication immediately. I'm very upset that I gave it to him and casued him to be this ill. I thought it would be better than the having him on a stimluant (Adderall). I hope this works out of his system by tomorrow. I think there shoudl have been studies involving more people and over a longer period of time before the F

15 April 03
I find it interesting that this new non=stimulant drug has the same side effects of the stimulant drug. that might be a key to look at when determining what is going on with our children. also on the strattera.com website, u read through some of the side effects and then see where they say, "this is not a complete list of side effects" ask your doctor.
read read read... you can't do that enough. and be careful.

hi, i am very confused with giving my child the drug strattera, and i dont know what to do the drs. tell me he needs it but the side effects scare me to death, what does a mom do when the child does well in school and socially and is pressed to have the child take this medication

Why on earth would they be pushing drugs if your child does well in school and is socially capable? Not that the drugs actually help with either of those in the long term, it's just that those are the usual excused. Sounds like you have an extra nutty school. Don't give in! There is plenty of good info on these sites that you can copy off and bring with you to show them. A lot of people in the school system are badly misinformed about this stuff. I would ask them what problem they are trying to solve with these drugs. Then I would ask if there are any other ways they can see approaching this problem. If they won't go there, you might want to consider homeschooling or an alternative school. But in any case, don't give in. Make it TOTALLY CLEAR to them that drugging will NEVER be an option, and they might as well start talking about other approaches, because they will not be able to convince you. If they keep it up, ask them if they feel qualified to make medical decisions, and if not, well, you and your physician will make those decisions privately and let's get back to talking about education. Just don't play, and don't be intimidated by their tactics. There are always other options, and they have no business bullying you the way they are. Confront them with the information and tell them that you don't appreciate their approach, and get the talk back to educational options. They can't make you do anything you don't agree to!

9 July 03
If your child has suffered any side effects from the new experimental non stimulant ADHD miracle pill, created by Eli Lilly and Company called Strattera? (atomoxetine HCl) please Let Us Know http://ww.ritalindeath.com/contact.htm your information could benefit many children in the future. Lawrence Smith http://www.ritalindeath.com

27 July 03
I was going to put in my comments about strattera on their website questionaire (link posted from your site) about how Strattera affected my seven yr old daughter. I would like very much to be of input on this because my daughter's behavior changed completely and it was NOT GOOD! I took her off it after 6 weeks - I saw the affects of the drug after 3 weeks and let it go to see if it was going ot increase or decrease - basically it made her stop eating - vomitted when she did eat, made her very mean and defiant to the point where she loved to get into trouble and do mean things to people, when she was punished she would scream and get so enraged that i feared she would pass out or have a heart attack. She was taking 40 mg a day at 60lbs. Just to let you know my daughter has ADD and it is a mild case - she gets hyper excited at times and is usually a good kid, she basically needs help with concetration at school and her processing - and if anyone out there knows first hand about the be-Calmed I would be so happy to get any info you may have.
Thank you!!!!!

[Deborah]

I know nothing about this guy or what specifically HE advocates, but I found his commentary to be thought provoking.
                *******************

Posted on Tue, May. 20, 2003
The Tallahassee Democrat

John Rosemond: ADHD is price we pay for bad parenting

A fellow recently approached me at a speaking engagement and asked if it was true, as he had heard, that I "don't believe" in ADHD.

My reply: I absolutely believe that a significant percentage of children in America exhibit the symptoms of attention-deficit (hyperactivity) disorder. Are these behaviors problematic? Yes. Are these behaviors caused by a gene or biological condition? I don't believe that they are, nor have I seen proof of that hypothesis.

"So you think ADHD is caused by improper parenting?"

Yes, but I'm not blaming individual parents. Just as a culture can embrace a dysfunctional political system, a culture can embrace a dysfunctional parenting philosophy. America did exactly that in the 1960s and '70s. You can't be blamed for thinking that the way 98 percent of your neighbors are raising their kids is the right way to raise kids."

I am convinced - and I am definitely in the minority, but I am not alone - that ADHD is one of many prices we are paying for adopting, 30 to 40 years ago, a "psychological" approach to child rearing, an approach that has absolutely nothing in common with the child rearing practiced before that time.

The simple fact is that you cannot raise children two entirely different ways and arrive at the same outcome. In the 1950s and before, parents and teachers did not have the sorts of problems with children that parents and teachers are having today.

Although some researchers are convinced that a biological smoking gun will eventually be found, the fact remains that one has not been found; its existence is speculative.

Pediatrician and author William Carey, who wrote "Understanding Your Child's Temperament" in 1997, says, "The assumption that ADHD symptoms arise from cerebral malfunction has not been supported even after extensive investigations" and "No consistent structural, functional or chemical neurological marker is found in children with the ADHD diagnosis as currently formulated." Carey is one of many investigators who have arrived at this conclusion.

"So, what do you think causes ADHD, John?"

The symptoms describe a child who is impulsive, unfocused, unwilling to apply himself to a task, inattentive, distractible, cannot wait his/her turn, and intrusive. That describes a typical toddler, a "terrible two."

The fact is, nearly every toddler "has" attention-deficit (hyperactivity) disorder. Furthermore, and again according to published diagnostic criteria, nearly every toddler "has" oppositional defiant disorder and bipolar disorder of childhood.

The typical toddler is unfocused, inattentive and impulsive - attention-deficit (hyperactivity) disorder. He screams "no!" when his parents tell him to pick up a toy (oppositional defiant disorder) or stop throwing his food. He flies into rages during which he hits, then bites and screams like someone possessed of demons (bipolar disorder of childhood).

Can you imagine the carnage that would transpire if, as is the case in the animal kingdom, human children reached full size within 2 years? Battered parent syndrome is not a pretty picture.

The pertinent question: Do the child's parents, with a combination of powerful love and powerful discipline (not harsh, mind you, but full of power), "cure" this anti-social state before the child's third birthday? Do they turn him into a pro-social human being? Or do they - out of ignorance, fear, or downright laziness - fail to properly discharge their responsibility to the child and the rest of us?

Too many American children today are reaching full size during toddlerhood, the result of child-centered families, enabling parents, a lack of persuasive discipline and an emphasis on the child's feelings rather than his or her behavior. This is not ADHD, but TIP, Toddlerhood in Perpetuity. And indeed, it is carnage.

John Rosemond is a family psychologist. Questions of general interest can be sent to him at Affirmative Parenting, 9247 N. Meridian, Indianapolis, IN 46260 and to his Web site: http://www.rosemond.com.

[Anonymous]

Were we really made so defective that millions of adults and children have to medicate themselves?  Anybody read Peter Breggin? Toxic Psychiatry. Do these children who are on meds grow up to be scholars, physicists, scientists, doctors etc.?  They grow up feeling there is something wrong with them. And we push that.They just survive and not thrive. The last documentary I saw on Ritalin showed that yes the behavior was better but NOT the grades, not the ability to learn. Alzheimers is really epidemic, could all these meds be causing this? Could our inability to deal with anger, rage, grief, our emotions be detrimental to us.  HELL YES!! What about LISTENING to a child and encouraging their imagination and finding out what is REALLY causing their behavior. Main stream America will never do this because OUR PARENTING IS HORRENDOUS! And we will never acknowledge that.  Children repress feelings they can't handle and it comes out in inattention and behavior!!! My God, the fear of being in day care away from mothers for children has to be horrible.  My heart hurts when I see a baby being carried in a child carrier instead of a mothers' arms, so the baby doesn't get that nurturing, smelling, feeling its mother.Yes children do self-medicate, but it's to stop those horrendous feelings that no-one will listen about. And we don't even realize it

[Anonymous]

Breggin is affiliated with Scientology and there is ABSOLUTELY NO EVIDENCE THAT PARENTING HAS ANYTHING WHATSOEVER TO DO WITH ADD.  he takes an absolutist position against all psychiatric drugs that is a complete reflection of their position.

And re:  are we all defective? Why do we expect brain disorders to be uncommon when we all expect to suffer various physical disorders throughout life?  No one thinks its weird that high numbers of people get cancer, heart disease, the flu, colds-- but when people start saying the rates of mental illnesses are equally high, we all think we must be overdiagnosing or something.

The brain is the most complex object in the known universe-- so why do we think it's abnormal that 3-6% of kids have a particular problem with it?  

The medications help some, and there's little evidence that they do harm-- correlation is not causation and these drugs have been used for decades without a great outbreak of anything.
The rising incidence of Alzheimer's is directly linked to greater life expectancy-- people are healthier and so are now living long enough to get it in large numbers for first time in history.  You don't need to grope for some drug explanation, which would have the timing wrong anyway since the first kids who took Ritalin in large numbers are only in their 30s and 40s anyway.

And in fact, parenting has very little to do with how children turn out (absent severe abuse and neglect).  There are kids with wonderful parents who are sitting in prison and those with the worst parents in the world who are great humanitarians.

Parents like to believe they have all this power to make kids into something-- but anyone with kids knows that at birth, they are extremely different from one another and that anyone who tries to make a gay kid straight or an intellectual kid into a jock is simply not going to get anywhere.  

Genes and peer influences (which parents can affect by what neighborhoods they live in, but not  by much more than that) account for a much larger proportion of variation in human personality than parenting.

[Anonymous]

And thanks to people like you (mainstream America)
children will continue to be drugged. And by the way alzheimers can start in the 50's.  As I said, not dealing with strong emotions can really screw up your body. What a stupid thing to say that parenting has nothing to do with how children turn out.  Do research on the criminals in prison who have horrendous childhoods, and it doesn't have to be severe abuse and neglect for the person to have mental problems either, just feeling resented as a child or a burden can do it.  There is no physical brain disorder with ADD, and the most important influence for a child is HIS FAMILY>  not genes and peer influence.  Take some child developement, I feel sorry for your children.

[kaydeejaded]

My God that constant toddlerhood thing sounded like half the people I know


in all seriousness I am a pysch major and have seen video clips of children 2 1 girl and one boy with ADDHD and they acted signifigantly signifigantly distracted and also had some tics and grimaces difficulty in social relationships

my point I think it is a real disorder it is just totally overdiagnosed now they are putting everyone who does not sit through 7hours of school which is unnatural anyway on meds

but the disorder in my opinion exsists it just now has become like prozac everyone is gettin a scrip for it if life is not prefect

people are idiots
ya'll noticed right? :question:  wasn't just me thinking that was it??

Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of it's victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busy-bodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those that torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0802808689/circleofmianithem' target='_new'> C.S. Lewis, God In The Dock

[Deborah]

http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/TorontoSu ... 2-sun.html
Thu, February 10, 2005
ADHD drug alert
By CP

HEALTH CANADA has ordered a once-a-day treatment for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder off the market after learning the drug has been linked to 20 sudden deaths and 12 strokes, including among children. And makers of related stimulants used to treat the commonly diagnosed condition have been asked to provide a thorough review of their worldwide safety data, Health Canada said in a release late yesterday.

None of the deaths or strokes associated with Adderall XR were reported in Canada, spokesman Ryan Baker said.
****

February 11, 2005
Senator Says F.D.A. Asked Canada Not to Suspend Drug
By GARDINER HARRIS and BENEDICT CAREY

WASHINGTON, Feb. 10 - A day after Canadian officials suspended the use of a hyperactivity drug amid reports of deaths associated with its use, Senator Charles E. Grassley of Iowa contended that United States health officials
had asked the Canadian regulators not to do so.

Senator Grassley, a Republican, said on Thursday that the Food and Drug Administration had made the request of Canadian health officials because the F.D.A. could not handle another "drug safety crisis." Mr. Grassley said he was basing his contentions on reports from whistle-blowers within the agency.

Dr. Robert Peterson, director general of the therapeutic products directorate at Health Canada, said through a spokeswoman that reports that F.D.A. had asked Health Canada to refrain from suspending the drug "are untrue."

Brad Stone, a spokesman for the F.D.A., declined to respond directly to Mr. Grassley's contention but said of Dr. Peterson's rejection that, "We believe the Canadian response is the correct one."Canadian health officials, citing 20 deaths among patients taking the British-made drug Adderall XR, said on Wednesday night that they were suspending sales of the hyperactivity drug
indefinitely. The F.D.A. is allowing the drug to continue to be sold in the United States, saying there is little evidence that Adderall XR caused the deaths.

Mr. Grassley, who has been investigating the Food and Drug Administration for about a year, demanded in a letter written on Thursday that the agency answer questions about any discussions its officials may have had with the Canadians about the drug.

Dr. Robert Temple, director of the F.D.A.'s office of medical affairs, said the agency's decision to permit the continued sale of Adderall was not influenced by the controversies swirling around the F.D.A.

"It's still our job to get as close as we can to the right answer and not panic and do things for the wrong reasons," Dr. Temple said.

Matthew Cabrey, a spokesman for the maker of Adderall, Shire Pharmaceuticals Group of Britain, said Adderall was safe and effective. "We are very surprised at the actions of Health Canada, and we disagree with their interpretations of the data around these extremely rare cases of sudden
death," Mr. Cabrey said.

The controversy - and the sudden appearance of Mr. Grassley, the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, in it - promises to engulf the F.D.A. in more questions about its oversight of the pharmaceutical industry.

Critics have accused agency officials of being too cozy with drug makers and of being slower than their counterparts in other nations to acknowledge drug-safety problems.

The controversy is also bound to fuel a long-running battle over whether drugs like Adderall and Ritalin are overprescribed to children, and whether the drugs' longterm risks have been adequately explored.

More than 700,000 Americans use Adderall and its extended release counterpart, Adderall XR. Shire sold $759 million of Adderall products in the United States last year and $10 million in Canada.

In the letter Thursday to the F.D.A., Mr. Grassley wrote that reports given to his staff suggested that the agency was not acting with scientific integrity.

"Unfortunately, such allegations raise additional concerns about the culture at the F.D.A.," he wrote.

Dr. Peterson of Health Canada described discussions between the two regulatory bodies as "collegial."

Differing health regulations govern the differing responses of the two agencies to the Adderall reports, Dr. Peterson said. Canadian law lets
regulators suspend a drug's sales while safety questions are investigated; United States law does not. Health Canada approved Shire's application to sell Adderall XR in January 2004. In September, the company reported to Canadian authorities that 20 people, 12 of them children, had died suddenly in the United States while taking the drug.

Shire asked the Canadian regulators for permission to change the drug's label to reflect the possible dangers, as had been done in the United States that month.

Some of the deaths, which had not been previously reported to Canadian authorities, occurred well before Health Canada approved Adderall XR for
sale, Dr. Peterson said.

Canada and the United States both require pharmaceutical companies to report all adverse outcomes from drugs promptly.

"We were surprised to find these cases," Dr. Peterson said in an interview on Thursday.

Dr. Peterson said that an early analysis of the data suggested that Adderall XR might be linked to two to three times as many sudden deaths as Ritalin and its cousin, Concerta, which are prescribed for similar disorders.

Further, Dr. Peterson said that Canadian authorities were uncertain about how to warn patients about the risks of sudden death.

"It's very difficult to generate a benefit-to-risk balance when the risk is sudden and unexpected death," Dr. Peterson said.

Mr. Cabrey of Shire Pharmaceuticals said that the company had forwarded reports of the deaths to Canadian authorities promptly.

Dr. Temple of the F.D.A. said that 7 children taking Ritalin and Concerta died during the same period that 12 children taking Adderall died,
suggesting equivalent risks. Many had structural problems with their hearts and several were engaged in vigorous exercise, he said.

There is little evidence that the drugs caused any of the deaths, he said."There is a tendency to believe that sudden death doesn't occur in
children. That is wrong," Dr. Temple said. He added: "Psychiatrists say that these drugs are needed. To get rid of them for something that may well be a background rate of death is not responsible."Doctors have known since the 1930's that stimulant medications like these can calm hyperactive, or aggressive, children. But no one knows precisely how the drugs induce this effect, and there have always been concerns about the drugs' long-term effect on development.

Prescriptions for these drugs to be used by children with attention-deficit disorder more than doubled in the 1990's, experts say, heightening the concerns of some doctors.

The drugs are far more popular in the United States than in Europe. Last year, doctors in the United States wrote more than 23 million prescriptions for the four most popular drugs used to treat attention deficit disorder.


Gardiner Harris reported from Washington for this article, and Benedict Carey from New York.