[throwaway54-762]

> However small the chemical difference, there is an enormous practical difference. Meth can produce an intense high. Adderall, not so much.

This just isn't true. Adderall is several amphetamines and the drug definitely produces a high. The medical application of the drug is this rush of dopamine and seratonin allows users to focus and ignore distractions.

The high is an amphetamine high, much like meth, actually. You've noticed that tolerance diminishes these effects; so have many meth users.

[simonster]

This just isn't true. Adderall is several amphetamines and the drug definitely produces a high. The medical application of the drug is this rush of dopamine and seratonin allows users to focus and ignore distractions.

There's no rush of serotonin. Amphetamines primarily affect the norepinephrine and dopamine transporters. They can affect serotonin transporters, but only in very high doses. (MDMA, or "pure" Ecstasy, affects primarily serotonin transporters, and has very different effects.)

The ratio of affinity for the dopamine transporter vs. norepinephrine transporter is substantially different between methamphetamine and dextroamphetamine (the principal component of Adderall). While both bind to both, methamphetamine has a stronger relative effect on the dopamine transporter as compared to dextroamphetamine.

The "classic" picture is that the norepinephrine transporter affects dopamine levels in prefrontal cortex and norepinephrine levels throughout the brain, and the dopamine transporter affects dopamine levels in the striatum. Striatal dopamine release is probably important for both the reinforcing effects of the drugs and their effects on motivation. Prefrontal dopamine release is probably important in improving focus. Because dextroamphetamine has a stronger relative effect on the norepinephrine transporter, it causes greater prefrontal dopamine release relative to striatial dopamine release, although both drugs still cause both.

So, the drugs aren't quite the same, and there's a reason Adderall and not methamphetamine is prescribed for ADHD, but you're right that a high enough dose will produce a high in either case. However, the action of the drug that produces the high isn't necessarily the (only) action that has therapeutic actions on ADHD. Atomoxetine (Strattera®), which only affects norepinephrine transporters and is comparatively non-addictive, is also effective against ADHD.

(While I am a neuroscientist, I'm not entirely up to date on the literature here, so take this all with a grain of salt.)

[throwaway54-762]

Thanks for going into more depth here. You understand it much more thoroughly than me =).

[JohnBooty]

Your body acclimates itself to just about anything - the weather, sugar, MSG, even frequent shampooing or Chap-Stick usage. That doesn't mean those things are comparable to meth.

Nobody I know feels that Adderall provides much of a high. Anecdotal, sure, but it seems like a heck of a statistical anomaly.

Then again, I don't know anybody that's experimented with unsafe doses of Adderall. I'm sure that at dangerously high doses, the effect isn't unlike meth.

Then again, that's true of just about anything even remotely psychoactive when you talk about large doses. Heck, 500-1000mg of pure caffeine will probably get you meth-like results.

[kragen]

No, large doses of different drugs have very different effects. Massive doses of caffeine will make you anxious, shaky, and give you heart palpitations, but it won't make you have sex all night long or hyperfocus like amphetamine.

The reason large doses of methamphetamine have very similar effects to large doses of amphetamine is not that in large doses, all drugs are similar; it's that methamphetamine is very similar to amphetamine.

[throwaway54-762]

> Your body acclimates itself to just about anything - the weather, sugar, MSG, even frequent shampooing or Chap-Stick usage. That doesn't mean those things are comparable to meth.

Yes, of course, tolerance isn't indicative of meth.

> Nobody I know feels that Adderall provides much of a high. Anecdotal, sure, but it seems like a heck of a statistical anomaly.

I would respectively disagree. Yes, typical therapeutic doses of adderall are smaller than typical recreational doses of meth. But that is comparing small apples with bigger apples ;-).

> Then again, I don't know anybody that's experimented with unsafe doses of Adderall. I'm sure that at dangerously high doses, the effect isn't unlike meth.

Or even just at non-dangerously high doses ("normal" meth doses). In other words, if the doses are similar, the effects are similar. You seem to be arguing that because meth is typically consumed at higher doses, it is different.

I agree that typical meth use is very different from typical medical adderall use.

[JohnBooty]

Haha. I'm afraid to look like I'm asking for my own recreational purposes, but what doses would that be?

Again, this is anecdotal and doesn't prove anything, but when I've taken too much Adderall at once I haven't found it very pleasant at all. It wasn't fun and nothing about those dosages made me want to repeat the experience, much less experiment with even higher dosages.

(For me, "too much" would be taking 15mg in a single dose. I know that's not a huge amount in the scheme of things.)

  > I agree that typical meth use is 
  > very different from typical medical adderall use.

I don't mean this rhetorically at all... what do you feel is the reason (or reasons) for this?

[loeg]

  > Haha. I'm afraid to look like I'm asking for my own
  > recreational purposes, but what doses would that be?

GP here (separate work/home accounts). Anecdotally, I get a mild high from 10 mg of dextroamphetamine or adderall, and have experimentally taken as much as 30 mg. But I have zero tolerance; I've taken amphetamines less than ten times in my life.

  > Again, this is anecdotal and doesn't prove anything,
  > but when I've taken too much Adderall at once I haven't
  > found it very pleasant at all. It wasn't fun and nothing 
  > about those dosages made me want to repeat the 
  > experience, much less experiment with even higher 
  > dosages.
  > (For me, "too much" would be taking 15mg in a single 
  > dose. I know that's not a huge amount in the scheme of 
  > things.)

Yeah, at 20-30 mg there are definitely negative side effects; I wouldn't want to do anything social, like the article's author describes, at those doses.

  > > I agree that typical meth use is 
  > > very different from typical medical adderall use.
  >
  > I don't mean this rhetorically at all... what do you 
  > feel is the reason (or reasons) for this?

I think they are introduced to people differently, on average. I think adderall is primarily introduced to people as medicine by some authority figure the person respects (doctor), and they're likely to stick to their prescribed doses. Vs, I think meth is more frequently introduced as a fun energy drug (or advertised as MDMA), with vague dosages, unknown quality and purity, etc. Maybe meth users titrate until they feel good, which means escalating dosages quickly due to tolerance. (I can't speak from personal experience here.)

I think some minority of both adderall and meth users (ab)use the stimulants to try and overcome drowsiness and focus more on their work, like some college students (including article author). I think a fair number of people do this without any bad outcomes (myself included). But a fair number also escalate in response to tolerance, and this kind of use is problematic. Maybe awareness of tolerance, neurobiology, etc, would help? I read a lot of erowid before I ever consumed any drugs, but I also have pretty strong self-control, so I don't know that it would work for everyone.

Anecdotally, I don't even try to use amphetamines for productivity anymore because they don't clear from my system fast enough to avoid interfering with my sleep. I'm more productive for one day (if that), but less productive over a two-day period.

[kragen]

> I don't even try to use amphetamines for productivity anymore because they don't clear from my system fast enough to avoid interfering with my sleep.

Some people have told me that they prefer cocaine to amphetamine specifically for this reason: its metabolic half-life is something like two hours, if I recall. Have you tried using cocaine instead? I'm not sure if the toxic side effects are more or less severe; maybe you know.

(Myself, I stay far, far away from the entire family of stimulants. The most I take is caffeine, and then only in the traditional drink forms, not in pill form.)

[throwaway54-762]

I wouldn't want to try and use cocaine to focus. While I've tried it once, I don't like the typical routes of administration, the lack of quality control, and financially, supporting the drug cartels.

The only drug I use regularly is caffeine, also (coffee) =).