[roel_v]

What are you saying, that people should build corralled pens for children so that they can 'thrive' on their natural ability to bounce from left to right and generally moving about a lot but accomplishing nothing?

Your appeal to emotion argument is detrimental to all those who are (through prejudices like yours) denied treatment for what is an actual, physiological brain defect. 120 mg is a lot, it may have been too much for you, or you may not have ADHD, I don't know. But denying that a disorder exists because you had a bad experience is intellectually dishonest and holding back the treatment of hundreds of thousands if not millions, and social acceptance of treating it.

The science is clear on this point: ADHD exists, it is treatable, and the quality of life of people who have it is improved significantly with medication and behavioral therapy. That methylphenidate works has been widely proven scientifically, and its effects have been studied for decades. It's true that we don't know everything about it, and we will need further studies for decades, but that doesn't take away from the dramatic improvements in functioning that many people get from it.

Your 'argument' seems to be based on 'But I was not myself.'. I'm sorry that you apparently feel that there is some sort of mystical 'true self' that is somehow different when your neural functioning is chemically improved, and I hope that until you come to terms with reality you can live a productive life and be generally happy. But until then, don't be the crab at the bottom of the bucket.

[_delirium]

How can you decouple self-image from "quality of life"? Presumably how someone subjectively feels is an important part of quality of life, not just objective things like their income levels and job security; someone who's really good at school but doesn't like themselves anymore isn't exactly having a high quality of life.

I'm not particularly up on ADHD research, but in antidepressant research this is now widely taken seriously, that the goal of antidepressants has to include improvement in subjective wellbeing, not solely reduction in suicide risk. Even if you don't care about subjective assessments (which, increasingly, psychiatrists do), there's also the practical reason that patients who don't like what a particular drug does to their personality are much less likely to continue using it as prescribed, making it important to find a match that the patient is comfortable with the effects of (unfortunately that's still mostly trial-and-error, because the effects of drugs vary a lot between individuals in thus-far poorly understood ways).

[Fwiw, I don't personally care much about a mystical "my real self", but I do think psychoactive chemicals can change one's personality---in fact that's almost definitionally what they do, to the extent that "personality" is just the aggregate of how the brain works---and that some changes can be ones I like living with, and others can be ones I don't like, so I'd prefer not to take drugs that change my personality in ways where I don't like the result.]

[Rexatron]

Is that so? I don't recall saying those things.

I did say an open space for them to get the energy out, so that when they return they are more able to focus on 'accomplishing things'. Whatever it is kids need to accomplish other growing up.

Yes, I'm biased (not prejudiced). Due my experience, which I stated clearly.

Taking a set of traits that don't work in modern society and calling it a DISORDER is the only intellectual dishonesty here. Prescribing meds for a behavioral traits that people don't approve of is selfish, controlling, and a true detriment to those kids.

That ADHD (which I did not deny exists, I stated it did, and that I believed it's genetic basis) is treatable by Ritalin/Adderall I don't deny.

I just happen to know the long-term effects are detrimental. Studies happen to back me up.

Studies also show behavioral therapy is as good as medication. It's far better for kids as they get to learn about life without being on drugs. They learn real life skills rather than brute force concentration through drugs.

"I was not myself" is true. I was drugged with something that crams neuro-chemicals into my brain making me into something other than I wanted to be.

There is no true self (especially mystical). There was a natural me and a me on Ritalin (which was very different). I would have preferred to learn the life skills I needed and haven't learned until recently. I had the experience for a reason and often I believe it is to let people know about it and possibly protect other kids from what I experienced.

Sincerely, -Crabby McGee

[onemoreact]

The human brain is arguably the most complex system on the planet. We have a very poor understanding of how it functions so we fall back to the old, "is this useful metric" and DISORDER only refers to things that are less than optimal.

There are plenty of environments where a mild level of ADHD is not an issue; unfortunately children are expected to be able to sit and concentrate for several hours a day. In that context the term DISORDER is appropriate which is not to say it can be compensated for just that there is an issue. There are plenty of ways to compensate for poor vision and people are starting to think of mental issues in those terms. Unfortunately it's harder to change the environment or give extra attention than a cheap external prosthetic. Thus, drugs are often the first choice, even if they have minimal value or just trade harming the user to help those around them.