[falcolas]

> because the disorder can simply be redefined

Respectfully, disorder already has a meaning. And it's a meaning enshrined in medicine and law (ADA). "Redefining" disorder does nothing but hurt people who have a disorder.

And ADHD has no correlation with IQ (which I think you know, but it' not just a focus sliding scale either). It's a disorder that encompasses the symptoms of time blindness, a lack of ability to control focus, emotional disregulation, rejection sensitivity dysphoria, reduced working memory, an inability to form habits, and executive dysfunction.

It's also associated with a physical change in the brain.

[cj]

I added an “edit” to clarify I don’t believe IQ and ADHD are connected.

“Redefining” could have instead said “Reinterpreting”.

The reality is the diagnosis for these disorders are completely subjective. The same logic could be applied to depression and SSRIs. It’s not like a blood test that tells me I have high cholesterol. It takes dozens of hours with a qualified medical professional to seriously diagnose someone with high confidence.

Also agree there are studies correlating it with physical changes in the brain. But those studies aren’t fully fleshed out and not useful for diagnosis. There isn’t a brain scan that can detect ADHD.

[quacked]

> There isn’t a brain scan that can detect ADHD.

I think it's important to note that even if there were, it wouldn't change the inherently arbitrary nature of ADHD diagnoses (as opposed to the more objective presence of a bacterial infection or an ACL tear). Such a brain scan would legitimize the careers of thousands of people and be deeply celebrated by insurers and physicians alike, as it would dramatically simplify the diagnostic procedure, but the scan would still just be "identifying brains that fall into several of these metrics 1-N we wrote down in the DSM". It would be possible to change the DSM such that the brain scan would have to be adjusted as well, which is very difficult to do with other conditions that are more obviously "real".

My two cents, although I admit I've put more like six cents into this thread in total, is that 95% of the suffering that those "with ADHD" experience come from poorly-designed schools and businesses, which keep them captured, tracked, and timed for deeply questionable societal benefits. I'm not about to say you can operate a space station or manufacture semiconductors or supply the US cold stowage network without a good amount of capturing, tracking, and timing, but I am going to say that much of the psychological torment ADHD-havers endure is because they're failing to live up to stupid, useless goals set by people with misguided ideas about why the goals exist.

[cj]

100% agree.

(I don’t normally reply just to say that, but it felt relevant given the thread)

[TeaBrain]

You misinterpreted the part of the comment you referred to. They aren't referring to redefining the word "disorder", but "the disorder", as in "ADHD". What they were referring to with the definition is how the definition of ADHD is completely arbitrarily defined, as the diagnosis isn't based on any genetic marker.

[hilux]

> ... how the definition of ADHD is completely arbitrarily defined, as the diagnosis isn't based on any genetic marker.

Did you know that 90% of cases of ALS aren't "based on any genetic marker"? Does that mean ALS is "arbitrarily defined"? What does that even mean? Are you saying it isn't real?

[TeaBrain]

I wasn't saying anything from my point of view. I was simply explaining the misinterpretation in the comment above, though I should have said biomarker instead of genetic marker.

[falcolas]

> the diagnosis isn't based on any genetic marker

Neither is depression, PTSD, autism, chronic pain, schizophrenia, narcissism, MPD, and so forth. But they all exist. And they can all be debilitating to the point of becoming a disorder. They all have treatments according to their classification.

Being invisible doesn't make it not be a disorder.

[cj]

We all agree it’s a disorder. No one is debating that.

[TeaBrain]

No one claimed disorders don't exist.