[nefitty]

I got new glasses a few weeks ago. As I was being fitted, I asked the guy if there were any tools I could buy that would help me adjust my glasses myself. He asked me what I do for a living. "I'm a programmer." "Well, would you want an optician messing with your code?"

People that specialize in mental health, psychiatry and brain research have concluded that ADHD is a diagnosable mental disorder. I'm glad they're doing that instead of trying to write books on rust or go.

More to your question, I think a lot of the common hesitance and skepticism is the result of stigma in the vein of anti-vax ideas. Some lay people think they know better than the medical community and won't hesitate to tell you their unqualified opinion. Consider them nuts. Try some treatments, read some books, work on your systems of support, and always remember it's REAL, don't be ashamed to struggle. You're not making it up. You're not faking it. You're not bad.

It might not be obvious to other people, but you just need a little help, like when someone breaks their leg or gets the flu. It's no one's business anyway, unless you decide to confide in them.

[dataflow]

> As I was being fitted, I asked the guy if there were any tools I could buy that would help me adjust my glasses myself. He asked me what I do for a living. "I'm a programmer." "Well, would you want an optician messing with your code?"

That's a pretty useless response when the entire premise is that you have no idea whether the task is simple or difficult. It really only makes sense when you already kind of understand the ease or difficulty of the task, at which point the response is kind of redundant. It would've been a lot more helpful if he'd said something more like, "This requires professional expertise, it's not something laymen can do." That would actually give you useful context.

Imagine how silly this exchange would sound when talking to a car mechanic regarding routine maintenance: "Are there any tools I can use to replace/jump-start/whatever my car battery?" "Would you want a mechanic messing with your code?" Uh, no, but the answer to the first question is "yes" nevertheless...

[nefitty]

I should have added smiley faces or something because our exchange was pretty cordial. I cracked up when he told me the coding thing. I knew from years of firsthand experience how easily and badly messing with glasses frames can go lol

[dataflow]

Oh I didn't mean to say it was impolite. I just meant the logic in his reasoning isn't really sound. If it was only intended in jest then it's a great conversation maker, but I thought it was worth pointing out the issue with the logic given that the ultimate goal was to apply similar logic to the OP's question.

[nefitty]

Ah yeah, I get that. I guess the optician's comment just struck me as deep in an abstract sense. It's like he pointed at some truism about specialization in contemporary society. That's completely counter to the extremely-online punk/hacker DIY ethos that resonates with me, so the effect was like getting my spine realigned.

[joepie91_]

> I got new glasses a few weeks ago. As I was being fitted, I asked the guy if there were any tools I could buy that would help me adjust my glasses myself. He asked me what I do for a living. "I'm a programmer." "Well, would you want an optician messing with your code?"

> People that specialize in mental health, psychiatry and brain research have concluded that ADHD is a diagnosable mental disorder. I'm glad they're doing that instead of trying to write books on rust or go.

Except the problem with the mental health industry is famously that the 'specialists' don't actually listen to the patients/clients/etc., and operate on wildly inaccurate and outdated views that ultimately end up harming those they are "treating".

Yes, ADHD is real, but "because a bunch of psychiatrists said so" is very much not the reason. And the specific way in which they describe it generally has almost nothing to do with what ADHD really is or how it's experienced by those who have it.

[alexb_]

Your conclusion is correct, but I really don't think treating scientific communities as the sole arbiters of truth is a good idea. Science is all about being continually wrong (that's what progress is), and the experts are wrong all the time, ESPECIALLY when it comes to fields such as the human mind. These types of fields are also subject to debate among experts - it's not as if EVERY single one all agrees on the same things.

>I think a lot of the common hesitance and skepticism is the result of stigma in the vein of anti-vax ideas.

Definitely disagree. ADHD has been misunderstood as "laziness" and many things similar for a very long time. It's not a recent phenomenon.

At the end of the day, who really cares if it is a real condition or not? What I know is that my life is improved when I take Concerta. If I didn't have ADHD/ADHD wasn't real, and Concerta made my life better, then that still doesn't change the end result of taking meds = net positive.

[nisegami]

>Some lay people think they know better than the medical community and won't hesitate to tell you their unqualified opinion.

The medical community doesn't have a great track record. Things have largely improved where most parts of the body are concerned, but I think psychiatry and psychology are still in their "four humours" phase.

[DestroyADHD]

Thank you. This is precisely my concern. A lot of medications that were given away like candies for depression are now turning out be harmful over the long term. So, I am not sure why HN is being so hostile to a sincere question I asked