Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by NextUserName 4472 days ago
Modern civilization has certainly invented ADHD. It used to be that if you had ADHD, you probably weren't a banker, lawyer or politician. You certainly would not work in a cubicle and rot away all day. You also lived 15 years longer than your sedentary counterpart. You would do a more physical job. Physical work often creates the necessary stimulation that so many of these ADHD cases need.

The argument that it just isn't fair that someone's mind is more suited for a desk job than someone else, so we should put them on equal footing by administering drugs the rest of their lives is a flawed and slippery slope mentality. Do we say the same the same thing for aspiring athletes who weren't born with the muscle mass to play pro football? "Lets make things fair and pump this kid full of roids so he can be an all pro linebacker"...

Severe ADHD sufferers I agree should be given medication, but the majority That I personally know (some of whom I worked with before and after meds) should just have changed careers. They still have problems while on the meds and also have to deal side effects from the mind altering drug they are using. Those I know who have either pursued alternate careers, or switched are much happier overall.

Imagine that, doing what traditionally, naturally was done leads to greater happiness... Wow

2 comments

Physical work isn't necessarily easier for those with ADHD than desk jobs. In high school and college I had some physical jobs. Those jobs are often menial, and the monotony and repetition are really the opposite of what those with ADHD (especially those with ADHD and high intelligence) are "naturally" suited for.

  Do we say the same the same thing for aspiring athletes 
  who weren't born with the muscle mass to play pro 
  football?
We don't "pump them full of steroids" because unlike the (admittedly imperfect) ADHD treatments we have now, muscle-building steroids have negative side effects that greatly outweigh their benefits.

We do give them the best medical care possible. If an aspiring athlete breaks a leg or has plantar fasciitis, we treat those things. We don't just say, "guess you weren't meant to be an athlete."

  It used to be that if you had ADHD, you probably weren't a
  banker, lawyer or politician. 
Yeah, and if you had bad eyesight, you were probably steered away from those professions as well.

And if you were left-handed people assumed you were under demonic influence or something.

And if you were dyslexic people assumed you were stupid.

I'm glad people like me are winning against people like you.

>Physical work isn't necessarily easier for those with ADHD than desk jobs. In high school and college I had some physical jobs. Those jobs are often menial, and the monotony and repetition are really the opposite of what those with ADHD (especially those with ADHD and high intelligence) are "naturally" suited for.

You simply had the wrong type of physical jobs. There are physical jobs that are mentally challenging as well.

>We don't "pump them full of steroids" because unlike the (admittedly imperfect) ADHD treatments we have now, muscle-building steroids have negative side effects that greatly outweigh their benefits.

OK then change steroids to HGH.

>We do give them the best medical care possible. If an aspiring athlete breaks a leg or has plantar fasciitis, we treat those things. We don't just say, "guess you weren't meant to be an athlete."

Apples to oranges. Bones heal naturally. ADHD does not go away by "resting".

>Yeah, and if you had bad eyesight, you were probably steered away from those professions as well.

And if you were left-handed people assumed you were under demonic influence or something.

And if you were dyslexic people assumed you were stupid.

I'm glad people like me are winning against people like you.

I see you are missing the point. How about this. In 20 years, 90% of people working in office jobs are taking ADHD medication Only 5% of them really have ADHD, but the rest have learned that they can concentrate longer and be more productive by using it. Now those with ADHD are no better off (on a relative scale) than those before these medications were invented. They often cannot compete with their non ADHD counterparts and lose their jobs (just like before ADHD meds came around). As a side effect, now billions of people on earth are taking a drug everyday that alters various things in their mind. They no longer think naturally and with the rational that they were born with. You think that this is good? This is where we are heading.

Like I said in another post, in those I know who changed careers VS those who take drugs every day, the ones who changed careers are far happier and have better quality of life mentally and physically.

Don't you want to be happier? Blame yourself and this system which has nudged you out of your natural path.

I think you're hinging a lot on this incredibly faulty belief:

  [Users of ADHD medication] no longer think naturally and 
  with the rational that they were born with. You think that 
  this is good? 
So which chapter of Scientology do you belong to?

Stimulants are, of course, psychoactive substances and nobody denies that, but you're blowing this so far out of proportion that you have zero credibility.

I bet you have lovely opinions about antidepressants and antianxiety medication as well. I suppose those people, too, should also just find lines of work that value depressed and/or anxious people just like Xenu intended.

>I think you're hinging a lot on this incredibly faulty belief:

First of all, this is not MY belief alone. It is listed among the side effects on the side of the box. Further studies have pretty much conclusively agreed that these drugs do affect reason and rational.

>I bet you have lovely opinions about antidepressants and antianxiety medication as well. I suppose those people, too, should also just find lines of work that value depressed and/or anxious people just like Xenu intended.

These are proven to be even worse of course. The sad thing is that many people who are on them do not need to be. This is like taking morphine when you have a broken leg and continuing to walk on it so it cannot heal, vs setting the bone and casting/resting it.

Also funny you should mention depressed people changing lines of work. A high percentage (over 10%) of people put on antidepressants have been found to have very low levels of vitamin D (something they never would have had if working outside). Many of them were also overweight and very out of shape. Many others were also later diagnosed with S.A.D. Something that people working outside rarely experience.

Antidepressants and ADHD drugs are often given as a quick fix. There are often alternatives that can fix the actual problem rather than mask the symptoms. That is all I am saying. You don't seem to be able to accept this fact, so out conversation must end here.

> The argument that it just isn't fair that someone's mind is more suited for a desk job than someone else, so we should put them on equal footing by administering drugs the rest of their lives is a flawed and slippery slope mentality. Do we say the same the same thing for aspiring athletes who weren't born with the muscle mass to play pro football? "Lets make things fair and pump this kid full of roids so he can be an all pro linebacker"...

Except that isn't the argument. Just like we don't try and save premature babies to try and "be fair" and we don't treat suffers of diseases to "be fair." There is no slippery slope argument here. The onus is on you to prove that there is in fact a slope and then to show how slippery it is.

> Physical work often creates the necessary stimulation that so many of these ADHD cases need.

Who are you to tell sufferers the best way to treat their condition? Don't you think it is best for people to get a say in their treatment?

The slippery slope is obvious. More and more people today are put on drugs to deal with problems that used to be dealt with naturally and without side effect. Secondly, more and more average people who don't really need these medications still get on them because they enhance their concentration and productivity. They give them abilities (an edge) that only a few in the general populace naturally have. Why is this bad? because these are mind altering drugs that people will take every day forever.

This type of behavior modification has always had (and always will) consequences.

> More and more people today are put on drugs to deal with problems that used to be dealt with naturally and without side effect.

You mean like HIV/AIDs, cancer, autism, epilepsy? Of course there aren't side effects if you aren't treating.

> more and more average people who don't really need these medications still get on them because they enhance their concentration and productivity

You are begging the question. First you are assuming their is some growth to the number of people being treated that don't require treatment. Secondly, you assuming that they are bad because they are "mind altering."

>You mean like HIV/AIDs, cancer, autism, epilepsy? Of course there aren't side effects if you aren't treating.

I can see that you cannot even reason logically and understand simple comparisons. No comparison can be made between trying to naturally cure HIV/AIDS and someone with a short attention span while sitting at a desk all day switching to a more suitable job.

>You are begging the question. First you are assuming their is some growth to the number of people being treated that don't require treatment. Secondly, you assuming that they are bad because they are "mind altering."

This is not my assumption. It is a proven fact. The criteria for diagnosed ADHD has changed so dramatically over the last 20 years, a person who is suffering from stress or sleep deprivation (with side effects of a lower attention span and concentration abilities) is commonly diagnosed with ADHD and put on meds.

This conversation is done. I refuse to try and reason with an illogical and senseless person.