> The actual reason why America is an outlier is widespread over-diagnosis.
> A typical ADHD diagnosis in America is done by a paediatrician or a family doctor in an office visit as brief as 15 minutes. The norm in Europe is an hours-long assessment by a psychiatrist.
Anecdotal evidence, but our experience is — and most people/teachers/doctors we talk to say — that most diagnosis are done via similar long tests.
I’ve not heard of doctors/teachers trying to address ADHD without a formal test being done.
Are others able to confirm that they know of diagnosis from a “15 minute doctor visit”?
EDIT: In fact, our insurance won’t even cover medication for our son without a formal checkup — every 3 months.
Sure, some may “unofficially” think or claim to have ADHD from talking to their doctor that may say something like “it’s possible you/your child has ADHD”, but I find it hard to believe that actual treatment/IEP (individual education plan) happens without a formal diagnosis.
Similar to another poster. Our 6 year old was just diagnosed with it.
The formal test was a short survey about our childs behavior in various situations. It was highly subjective with questions similar to "My child has difficulty sitting still" (Never, Sometimes, Often).
There was not example of what is considered sometimes or often and what is age appropriate for a 6 year old.
The survey was required to be answered by the parents and kindergarten teacher. That was all that was necessary to have the option of medication.
Even more surprising is that with only slight more effort we now have the option to put our child on an IEP (indivdualized education plan) where there will now be a full additional teacher in the classroom assisting her.
Overall it has been an eye opening experience. Compared to our first child, our 6 year old is more spirited, but is not violent or defiant. She is mostly concerned with her own interests and will admittedly have difficulty focusing for long periods of time. I would be very curious if her behavior is above the threshold for ADHD in other countries.
This was just our experience and it is very possible that our child was an obvious case so further analysis was not necessary. For now we have opted not to use medication. Interestingly our diagnosing pediatrician has two children with ADHD and said that they put both children on medication at 6 years old.
This is like every 6 year old lol. I bet you I would have been diagnosed with ADHD if I was tested, but in truth I was just an active kid who didn’t like sitting in a classroom chair all day.
There is definitely a difference between ADHD not sitting still and normal kid not sitting still.
My kid was continuously falling off his chair because he was creating a tension bridge between his chest on the edge of the table and his feet on the seat of his chair.
It was driving his kindergarten teacher crazy lol.
Related: it was a 15 minute doctor visit for us, but both me and my wife have ADHD so the doctor looked at the survey and said "boy howdy, I think you guys know what you are talking about"
Yes, I have such a diagnosis and can confirm this, but it was many years ago. I assume it's still the same.
I got a short quiz to see what symptoms I was complaining about and then I got asked about my drug usage and why I was seeing them.
I told them that I tried a friend's adderall once and I felt so much better immediately.
They told me drinking 2 pots of coffee a day, doing tasks out of order, "just in time laundry", and being "excitable" is actually ADHD and that I'd be better off if I took these pills every day and cut way back on the caffeine.
It took about 15 minutes.
What other questions would you have? Do you think you'd need to give me the long-form test? Lol.
I followed the advice btw. It's going well many years later and I hope RFK doesn't take the stimulants away.
In california (and i would have guessed nationally) at least you do need a long form test in order to get control prescription like adderall. But the test is more of a "video game" style that tests your attention
Adult diagnosis is weird. I’m assuming you were not a child drinking that much coffee. Adults have decades of coping mechanisms obscuring the signal, and yet just talking to an adult with ADHD for an hour will tell you whether the person has ADHD instead of being a stimulant junkie that read the DSM to present manufactured symptoms. It’s exhausting to talk to someone with ADHD for hours if you don’t have exactly the right disposition (like being a polymath or having it too).
They will still often want you to do a sleep study, because chronic lack of quality sleep or chronic stress looks a hell of a lot like ADHD. It’s also why you want the person with ADHD to write or at least copy edit your emergency procedures because they haven’t just adopted chaos, they were born in it, molded by it. They were adults before they ever saw order and to them it was just blinding. They will absolutely write a procedure that won’t skip steps or overly rely on the actors to be calm and present of mind to pull it off.
This is wild. It took me ~20 years as an adult to get diagnosed because I couldn’t get my shit together to keep going back to neuro-psychiatrists to progress through the testing pipeline.
In my ten years as a teacher, I've had just one student whose pediatrician prescribed ADHD meds, much to the alarm of my colleagues. Typically, an ADHD diagnosis is the result of either a full neuropsychological evaluation, which requires several visits with a clinical psychologist and extensive observation forms for teachers and parents to complete.
At my university I know at least one person who intentionally tested positive soley for profit - the drugs sold/sell for huge markups, especially around exam time.
No idea what all it entailed other than the fact that they're unable to screen people out when I assume there are probably quite a lot of people doing or trying to do what he did.
It's possible the process is tuned to make sure most people who need it can get it even if that means some people can abuse the system and their fellow people.
Barely. I am diagnosed and it is difficult to get. If there is a shortage I just get the shaft. If I try to renew early I get put on a list. The amount of appointments and follow up calls required is like putting stairs in front of a wheelchair store.
>Are others able to confirm that they know of diagnosis from a “15 minute doctor visit”?
Yes, I got mine this way. Telehealth during Covid was notorious for this, but lot of NP/PA offices now do the same thing, just with a single in person visit.
Yeah I got a prescription. IMO, these are pill farms. Everyone talks about how the medical industry is so driven by money, but somehow when it comes to mental health, people seem to shrug off the fact that everyone from the pharma companies down to the doctors office stands to make money by diagnosing and prescribing.
I think tribal and political social media discourse has exacerbated this effect, by which I mean, blanket acceptance of the ADHD diagnosis process and medication is now left-coded.
Conspiracy theorist anti-vax types exhibit "Big Pharma" skepticism, so media and pundits take great care to remind people of this. They want them to believe that they're picking a side in tribal politics.
edit: Another way it becomes left-coded is exhibited in this thread: victimization and grievance politics.
Anecdote - I'm in no way antivax or auth right but I still have a very strong skepticism to big pharma and corruption in general. I think about Purdue pharma often and how they showed just how much money you can print with some bribery and a sociopathic disregard for human life. Killing Americans is big (and shockingly safe) business if you cut the right folks in and do it at large scale!
Not parent, but yes I got medication. The work adjustments were me meeting deadlines, not procrastinating, being able to focus on one task at a time, etc. Absolute game changer. For some of us, it's completely obvious. Some, less so.
Adult me had a therapist visit for anxiety, after an hour with the first guy he said that he suspects mild ADHD, but it would need to be confirmed by someone else and it wasn’t something he would prescribe anything for in the mean time. No idea what is next but most of this is outside my budget currently so it’s on hold. Doesn’t seem easy to get a confirmation in my experience
I have two children diagnosed with ADHD. The first was acting so erratic in class that he ended up missing four weeks of school because they kept sending him home. The doctors suspected ADHD, but refused to diagnose it without going through the full process. Short-term therapy, then long-term therapy followed by a psychiatric review. Once he got medication everything went back to normal.
We just started the evaluation with our second child and it's the exact same process. Not that I doubt some doctors cut corners, but I haven't personally seen it.
This was our experience with our daughter about a decade ago. Her school required a diagnostic test that took several hours and cost several thousand dollars.
It took me 15 minutes, thank God, because seeing a psychologist and psychiatrist would have taken 18 months and cost me much more for something I obviously have.
Back in the 1970s I had a bed wetting problem. They tried a medication called Ritalin to address this problem. This medication had an interesting side effect of making me pleasant to be around for the first time in my life. Both my parents and all of my teachers remarked on how much better I was able to pay attention and be kind to other people. Then they took me off the medication and I reverted to my wild ways. I don't think many or any people had heard of ADHD back then, so it didn't occur to anyone to try to medicate me for what I clearly had. Over the decades I've learned to cope with ADHD without medication, but I can't help but wonder how much better my life would have been if I had been able to concentrate and not been so hyperactive. Maybe I would have done better in school and had friends.
Even today, I wonder if I should go through the trouble of being diagnosed and getting on medication. The last three days I wasted my time instead of doing the work my company pays me to do and got exactly nothing done. The entire time I kept thinking, "I really should do that work so I can keep my job and provide for me family" but I couldn't concentrate and procrastinated day after day.
Most of my children have ADHD. Before they could be diagnosed, they did have to go through extensive testing by a psychiatrist and there were interviews conducted with us as their parents and with their teachers. The 15 minute diagnosis mentioned in the article has not been my experience. We have regular meetings (every 6-8 weeks) with the psychiatrist to evaluate their dosage and how things are going.
> but I couldn't concentrate and procrastinated day after day
Please make sure to take care of yourself and try going through with the diagnosis. What you described is very similar to what I was going through - severe procrastination which resulted in worse and worse performance at work, eventually I had to quit my job because of it. Later I’ve learned procrastination of this magnitude is basically your subconscious screaming at you that something is not right and you should be taking care of yourself instead of forcing yourself to work.
On a side note - ADHD is hereditary so if your children have it there’s a good chance you and/or your SO have it too.
Hey! I got diagnosed with ADHD last year as an adult and getting diagnosed and medicated has been a massive improvement in my quality of life. If you have the energy to do it, I would strongly recommend it. The medication is great—I have far fewer "stare at the wall, bounce in my seat, get nothing done" days—but I also appreciate having a concrete diagnosis. Even after decades of assuming I had it, it felt good to actually hear it from a doctor for some reason.
> Even today, I wonder if I should go through the trouble of being diagnosed and getting on medication
Maybe talk to people diagnosed with ADHD as adults? Of my acquaintances like that, they mention an immediate improvement. The benefits were very obvious to them.
It is almost as if we should test for ADHD by just testing amphetamines in questionable situations and just seeing if people respond well?
Likely very questionable advice, but if you are a risk-taking type then maybe score something and just test it on yourself? Try to be scientific of course. And try to understand the risks (which you need to understand even if you were diagnosed by the medical system).
I had a bedwetting problem too. It was awful and tormenting, when visiting friends I had to bring clothes and sleep on the floor. Male puberty solved it almost to the day. All of a sudden it was gone and what a relief that was. I think it was just training the lizard brain to hold things a little tighter during sleep, or until then the nerve pathways were not supple enough.
> A typical ADHD diagnosis in America is done by a paediatrician or a family doctor in an office visit as brief as 15 minutes.
I'm in my 30s, and in the process of receiving a diagnosis after it had been suggested to me my entire life by teachers, colleagues, and friends. I avoided diagnosis and medication mainly because I was skeptical of the safety record of medications -- probably because that's why my parents never sought a diagnosis for me when I was younger.
After doing more research the past few years, I learned that ADHD medications are the success story of medical management of psychiatric illness, and they have a strong safety record
In any case, for me so far it has involved four (4) 2-hour appointments with a clinician, having trusted colleagues and close friends fill out detailed "external rater" forms in which they rated my executive dysfunction, and (yesterday) a marathon 4-hour long testing session in which I took a sequence of standardized tests under the supervision of a clinician.
I know that diagnosis of ADHD in children is a different animal, and even for adults there are clinics that provide a diagnosis and prescription in a half hour or so -- but not everyone with ADHD is diagnosed after a single 30 minute session with a provider. And contrary to another sibling comment, there are fairly robust objective metrics for identifying the hallmark features of ADHD and executive dysfunction.
If you are truly interested, these can be found with a quick search query -- I won't do that here for you.
But you will find that ADHD is one of the most widely studied psychiatric illnesses with strong neurobiological basis and well known measurable correlates, and as I mentioned, has the highest response rates to medication for a psychiatric condition. So you should have no trouble finding out more!
No, a description of ADHD features is easy to find, but not "robust metrics".
When searching specifically for metrics used in diagnosis, some choice words come up from med central:
"A challenge with diagnosing ADHD is that the characteristics associated with the disorder – such as difficulties with focusing, shifting/dividing attention, managing frustration, organization/poor time-management, working memory, and staying engaged – are common symptoms that could have a breadth of etiologies.
As noted, *more often than not*, ADHD coincides with another disorder. "
Then for narrow-band symptoms will list examples of neuropsychological measures like D-KEFS, and finding details for each of these is again like pulling teeth. But looking at the description, all of what is tested could be impacted by other issues, including instability in home life, lifestyle factors, anxiety and depression, insomnia, etc
> Few things agitate Robert F. Kennedy junior, America’s new health secretary, more than the rate of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) among American children. And for good reason
I'm sorry, let me stop you there. What in the world are you talking about? The government's main guy looking after America's health is obsessed with ADHD diagnosis rates -- for good reason? That is absolute madness. Got nothing better to do, I guess. No infinitely long tail of the global pandemic that was ravaging the population a couple of years ago? The threat of bird flu? Dare I mention health insurance?
I can't read the article, but I can say (a) that Americans are generally much less opposed than Europeans to treating mental disorders through medication, and (b) the best available information tells us that ADHD is underdiagnosed, not overdiagnosed, even in America.
The moral hazard is pretty clear. Testing is profitable and so are the drugs. If they are wrong, there is no penalty. For the same reason an optometrist lied about my perfect vision as a child and conned my parents into glasses I never used paid for by insurance.
Remember doctors are there to advise not to command, know the hazards and be willing to say no or consider the data from your own perspective.
I like to tell people if you go to a carpenter to build a table, you'll get a wooden table. If you go to a stone cutter, you'll get a marble table. If you go to a welder, you'll get a metal table.
The trick is to know who to go to get what you want. In the USA with PPO there is generally zero friction to just making yourself an appointment with a speciality doctor and that specialty doctor will use his "toolbox" to create the outcome that you came to him and paid for. If you go to a psychiatrist, well their tool is prescription medicine, so that is what they'll use.
This sounds like common sense, but i think the population at large places too much trust in the doctor. In the US you have to be your own advocate.
An idle idea I’ve had is that the healthcare bureaucracy in the U.S. can get so bad that one wishes one can hire a lawyer-type of role to navigate it as a paperwork proxy of sorts. But perhaps greater scope is needed- a personal medical advisor who has the domain knowledge, while being independent of the incentives that drive others in the health system.
I suppose in the past that would just be your family doctor, wasn’t it.
Doctors in the US do not suffer for the lack of patients. In most cases, psychiatrists are booked for months in advance. A lot of ADHD med prescription renewals are now handled by nurse practitioners as a result.
It's literally a 5-minute call: "Do you have any unusual side effects? How would you rate your depression/anxiety? OK, the prescription was sent to your pharmacy".
> The gross margin on amphetamine salts even at $20 must be insanely high. We're talking about what, a couple grams of active amphetamines in a month?
This is about as low as drug prices go in the US. And for amphetamines there's an additional overhead of having a pharmacist checking your ID, storing the drug in a safe overnight, filling out the DEA forms (for every link in the supply chain), etc.
Good Rx shows the price for amphetamine salts at $15 now (in Walgreens in my area).
I can definitely tell that the profit basis for ADHD diagnoses is just not there. There isn't much money in it for doctors or pharmacies.
Because what used to be a generic indicator of distracted early childhoods (whether by nutrition, environment, weird parenting) got a new name.
And it is no coincidence or surprise that brain stimulants like amphetamines dominated the first wave of treatment. People 'perform' better on amphetamines, always have. They work so long as you concentrate on the short term and ignore long term issues like increasing tolerance, increasing demand and ultimately schizophrenia from chronic deep sleep deprivation.
I have always had ADHD, but I had zero access to mental health care when growing up. I was lucky because I'm really good at math (including competition-style math) and computer science, so it did not cause a _lot_ of issues at that time.
Over time, I adapted on my own. E.g. by buying several sets of things like scissors and screwdrivers so that I don't end up misplacing _all_ of them. Or by structuring the work so that I can switch attention between high-priority tasks.
> If you don't believe you have it, was this why you didn't previously consider taking performance-enhancing drugs?
I was really apprehensive about using mind-altering drugs, and amphetamines always sounded pretty scary.
On a more philosophical basis, should performance-enhancing drugs be available more widely anyway, with appropriate safeguards against abuse?
> On a more philosophical basis, should performance-enhancing drugs be available more widely anyway, with appropriate safeguards against abuse?
I recently came across this article discussing a study which found that stimulants lower productivity in people without ADHD.
> “Our results suggest that these drugs don’t actually make you ‘smarter’,” said Bossaerts. “Because of the dopamine the drugs induce, we expected to see increased motivation, and they do motivate one to try harder. However, we discovered that this exertion caused more erratic thinking — in ways that we could make precise because the knapsack task had been widely studied in computer science.
> “Our research shows drugs that are expected to improve cognitive performance in patients may actually be leading to healthy users working harder while producing a lower quality of work in a longer amount of time,” said Bowman.
I question even calling it an "over" diagnosis, when its not even clear that the diagnosis has any non-socially constructed objective metrics by which we can call that diagnosis accurate.
The diagnostic criteria is entirely subjective. "Often loses thigns", "Often doesn't pay attention" isn't exactly objective. How do we even know what "often" is?
But more than that what is the condition, if the only means we have of defining it is a subjective biased interpretation by an individual?
I am sure there are differences in brain chemistry that make one more stimulated, more long term goal oriented, and etc, but given the complexity of the human brain, and our lack of understanding/tools to measure, its not clear to me we should be so sure given any patients failure can be directly attributed to a singular condition.
So much of psychiatry is like this, though. There are the extreme conditions where everybody agrees "yes, something is wrong with his brain," or "clearly his mind was broken by circumstances and now he needs help," or "that's the most severe case of autism I've ever seen," but there are also more nebulous conditions: anxiety, depression, AD(H)D, autism spectrum, personality disorders, etc.
This isn't to say that those conditions aren't precisely defined or that they aren't real, but they might be at least partially a product of our society.
Your skepticism about whether an issue "can be directly attributed to a singular condition" is just good medicine. As conditions are studied more, often it's discovered that it's actually a few different conditions that share some symptoms. Maybe all of these sometimes wishy-washy "we didn't have this when I was a kid" conditions are just medicine learning more about the mind.
Fundamentally we want to be adapted to our environment. As the conditions for success change, what was prior adaptive is now maladaptive disorder. Being institutionalized in a school after spending hundreds of thousands/millions years out in nature/fighting/hunting/building shelter has consequences.
Much of disorder is likely just maladaptive for, as uncle Ted put it, the post industrial revolution.
> Maybe all of these sometimes wishy-washy "we didn't have this when I was a kid" conditions are just medicine learning more about the mind.
I think it's likely that as well as a healthy dose of "the world was way different when I was a kid, and didn't have as much of X, Y, Z, which contribute to the formation of maladaptive neurological patterns"
I have ADHD (diagnosed ~28 years ago, so well before "it was cool"), and honestly might kind of agree with you in that it could easily be a collection of neurodivergences that just get labelled ADHD. Add to that, lots of overlap with Autism spectrum[1], which probably has the same issue, and likely leads to misdiagnosis of one vs. the other, comorbid diagnosis, and the blunt categorization of neurological conditions which could very well be distinct, and at the very least sometimes have very different collections of symptoms into broader "ADHD" and/or "autism" categories.
Yes, and at the end of the day, these diagnosis aren't there to pathologize people, but to actually provide help, even if critics don't believe so.
This is something you only understand if you dealt with neurodivergent people. Suddenly it all makes sense, once you learn that their brains filter and process information in a somewhat different way, resulting in all kinds of different observable symptoms.
They used the TOVA test to diagnose mine. It measures what part of the attention paradigm may be deficient or overactive. AFAIK that test isn’t purely subjective.
I heard of this. My immediate criticism, is that even those with diagnosed ADHD aren't just deficient in focus/attention and impulsive in all aspects of their lives. They can drive a car, play video games, read subjects they are interested in, have long conversations, etc. That is to say, focus/attention/arousal are rather complex phenomenons that vary greatly based on circumstances, and aren't simple numbers we can say one is deficient in.
Testing someone in a completely artificial environment (sitting in an office during a diagnosis playing some tasks clicking on a computer screen) is hard for me to believe is exactly an accurate metric for revealing any of these things. Most especially, when a lot of people are actively seeking this diagnosis, and are motivated to alter their behavior to get the result they are looking for.
Im really curious how this company decided these tests are accurate at all. I assume they did some studies to find some variability in the test results and those who were already diagnosed and then determined those variability were indicative of ADHD. So what test is really doing IMO is just reinforcing the standard diagnostic criteria.
People with ADHD actually have an increased risk of motorvehicle accidents, and don't perform as well in certain kinds of games compared to people who don't have ADHD (when you account for experience playing video games etc). The TOVA test is essentially a simple video game -- it's a computerized test that checks reaction times to a targeted stimulus that appears on a computer screen. There are different classes of error that correspond to different kinds of executive dysfunction
You are right that attention is a complex phenomenon, but keep in mind that people who evaluate ADHD are aware of the limitations -- that is why TOVA isn't typically the only mechanism used for diagnosis. ADHD evaluation often involves multiple sessions in which other possible explanations are ruled out or explored, along with questionnaires from friends and family who know the person -- incidentally some of the questions on the ones I collected from my friends/family were about my driving!
Even with this, there are still limitations, but there's no need to throw the baby out with the bathwater -- the goal is to produce an actionable explanation that we can use to reduce suffering, and for many people this explanation does exactly that.
>Even with this, there are still limitations, but there's no need to throw the baby out with the bathwater -- the goal is to produce an actionable explanation that we can use to reduce suffering, and for many people this explanation does exactly that.
So did shamens, tarot readers, and psychics. The "actionable" part of all this is prescribing stimulants. Why can't we just focus on prescribing stimulants to those who would benefit from stimulants? Is the "ADHD" part of it really necessary?
The actionable part includes stimulants, but also self-awareness and structure. Stimulants alone won't usually lead to the kinds of changes that improve quality of life. Virtually any clinician and expert on this topic agrees with this point
I don't understand your question about whether or not the "ADHD" part is necessary. Yes, we should have words for complex ideas.
The comparison to shamans and tarot readers comes off as dismissive and uninformed, and generally in poor taste. Ultimately you are questioning a diagnostic framework that you don't understand very well given your other comments. There are critiques to be made and even aspects of your position that I agree with but you really need to understand the framework you intend to tear down before tearing it down
My point is giving people any explanation for their problems - so long as its backed by authority helps them - it says nothing to the truthfulness of those explanations.
Anyway youre being really dismissive too instead of just responding to my points. If you think Im being dumb fine Im just not interested in an emotionally heated argument.
I apologize if I seem dismissive of people's mental health - not my intention Ive been dealing with them my whole life. Take care.
>People with ADHD actually have an increased risk of motorvehicle accidents,
Does this mean that you identified a definite cause, or does this mean as part of an ADHD diagnosis, you managed to capture a group of individuals with specific traits like being more impulsive, taking higher risks, etc?
I can for example, make up 9 seemingly related symptoms, and given a large enough population millions of people will fit it. Then I assure you I can do a wide range of studies that will find that my group of people will deviate from the norm in X,Y,Z.
Also weirdly enough, I noticed I make a lot more mistakes while driving while on adderall.
I'm not sure what your point is -- but you might look into Chesterton's fence. It's a metaphor that illustrates a common trap that lots of smart people fall into.
Is this like the sophisticated version of negging? I think itd have been easier to just give me few worss to look into.
I bought into the whole "I have Adhd thing thats why Im failing at school" thing 13 years ago and have since then spent countless hours thinking and talking about it.
Im glad it helps people, but unless someone can prove definitive facts about my brain, I have all the answers I need as to why I am who I am or why I do what I do. And yes stimulants help sometimes when Im forced to do shit I have zero interest in for prolonged periods of time, simple as that
There are indeed several widely used objective metrics that can be used to identify hallmark symptoms of ADHD. The difficult part isn't really identifying those symptoms so much as distinguishing from other conditions that can cause many similar symptoms. But OP is not correct in suggesting that there aren't objective metrics -- ADHD probably has more of these than any other psychiatric illness.
In any case, I still think of ADHD and a lot of psychiatric diagnoses as models. We try to make these models useful to relieve suffering. They are far from perfect, but it doesn't make sense to throw the baby out with the bathwater and discount the many people who have been helped
>But OP is not correct in suggesting that there aren't objective metrics -- ADHD probably has more of these than any other psychiatric illness.
What am I missing?
>In any case, I still think of ADHD and a lot of psychiatric diagnoses as models. We try to make these models useful to relieve suffering. They are far from perfect, but it doesn't make sense to throw the baby out with the bathwater and discount the many people who have been helped
This is what it keeps getting down to every time I have this discussion. But I really feel like the discourse is hindering having an deeper understanding of the topic. The mental model and the resulting language, like people saying "I HAVE X,Y,Z" seems to be somewhat philosophically askew. Everything I read seems to point more to "X is a real objective thing, and were trying to find better ways of diagnosing it", rather than "X is what we call these assortment of symptoms alot of patients seem to exhibit which is helped by Y"
From a patient standpoint I think its a monumental difference with people saying things like "I am like Y because I HAVE X", as if X, what was the observed collection of (possibly unrelated) symptoms, now being a cause in itself.
RE what you are missing -- from your other comments I feel you haven't done much prior reading on the topic. There's lots out there, so go for it!
There has been lots and lots of writing on the phenomenology of mental illness and modern mental health culture. There is lots to not like: for instance it tends to encourage excessive rumination and negative feedback loops and over-identification with these designations, as you say. This is why I prefer to think of my diagnoses as models -- they are approximate descriptions of my behavior, and the treatments prescribed are also approximations, and it's up to me to use these as tools to improve my life. But you might enjoy reading some prior art on the topic
But in any case, if the tools aren't useful, then discard them -- I was diagnosed with PTSD in my early 20s, and at the time it was a tremendously helpful and eye-opening -- it hadn't occurred to me that the violence I experienced was impacting me so many years later, but when someone pointed it out to me, I was able to adjust the ways I related to myself and other people, and for the most part, my symptoms are in remission today. I no longer think of myself as "someone with PTSD" -- it's no longer a helpful lens through which I can understand myself
Perhaps you’d find Stephen Grossbergs models on how the ADHD brain processes information interesting. I can’t disagree that ADHD might be too wide an umbrella and I find the medicine is best taken on an as needed basis to augment other coping mechanisms.
There are defined diagnostic criteria but those are somewhat arbitrary, and evaluation of those criteria is highly subjective. Different clinicians often assign different diagnoses to the same patient. There are probably multiple different underlying pathologies that cause ADHD symptoms.
There’s a common suggestion that the condition isn’t real for a whole lot of diagnosed people. Schools are prisons and perhaps being bad at being forced to sit through long and unengaging education isn’t a disease. A kid being bored and preferring to run around outside isn’t a disorder.
It's weird, I'm sure I have ADHD but it's very hard to get a diagnosis. Several of my friends have it and I'm exactly the same as them. I'm not in America though (very thankful for that considering what's happening there now)
There are newer, non-amphetamine drugs for treating ADHD like Strattera, an SNRI (Selective Norepinephrine Re-uptake Inhibitor). It will be interesting to see what happens if and when these drugs displace the amphetamines (the current front-line treatment for ADHD) to the point that getting a prescription for Adderall or Vyvanse or some other form of medicinal speed because you have (or think you have) ADHD becomes difficult or impossible.
Why would that be a desirable state of affairs? Drugs have varying effects on people, including side effects. Making it difficult to get prescription for stimulants guarantees that a lot of people with ADHD (it seems like 50% don't respond to Strattera) won't have access to medication that would help them.
You can't see why an ADHD diagnosis (which isn't hard to get) no longer being a quick ticket to getting amphetamines--one of the most commonly sought-after and regularly abused class drugs since the 1930s--would be a desirable state of affairs? Are you not aware of the adverse health affects they have (cardiovascular, neurological, e.g., Parkinson's, dental, bone density)?
> it seems like 50% don't respond to Strattera
It's seems more like people take longer to respond to Strattera and either don't want to wait, or just want the amphetamines.
Undiagnosed ADHD-PI/-C ruined my life from childhood, teenage years, and early adulthood. I blame by ignorant, opinionated father for espousing conspiracy theories.
I myself was diagnosed twice. I don't have it, at all. Notwithstanding any perverse incentive to diagnose, the process itself is not stringent and borders on pseudo-scientific. It's not to say ADHD doesn't exist, but that they (psychiatrists) egregiously cast too wide a net.
You might ask how I know I don't have it. No one really cared about other symptoms I exhibited: chronic insomnia foremost, and some anxiety. Once I got a handle on that with non-pharmaceutical interventions, my focus was fine.
And to the extent that insomnia was given any credence, it's to push pills. Generously you could say practitioners default to that because it's so often demanded by clientele, they want to just press a button to make problems go away. But they just don't bother giving you an alternative.
edit: would also mention, the first time I was diagnosed as a young child was because I was a bored daydreamer who didn't always pay attention to the teacher. This is what we're treating as a weakness to be rooted out.
It's hard to tell what your diatribe is actually in support of. Is it overprescription that is predatory capitalist BS, or somehow skepticism of this entire process?
My kid's psychiatrist said that ADHD isn't a "real" disorder in the same way that other mental health issues are. He told us (I'm paraphrasing and I might get some terminology wrong) that back in the 70s, psychiatrists and psychologists noticed a lot of kids were hyperactive or having trouble behaving in class. They studied it and came up with a list of 10+ symptoms they could associate with this, and then they worked backwards and said "If the child has 5 out of these symptoms then they have ADHD." (I think it was called ADD at the time) The reason why they chose 5 is because if they chose 4 then too many kids would be diagnosed with it, and if they chose 6 then too little children would be diagnosed. So they settled on 5 because 15% of the kids could be diagnosed with this.
This is the reason why ADHD isn't the same as other mental health issues, because it was empirically determined instead of finding an actual issue like depression or borderline personality disorder, etc. This is also why there is such a large leeway in being diagnosed with ADHD and why it's overdiagnosed.
This isn't to say that many kids don't need medication to help them concentrate in school and to achieve academically, or to control their behavior. We have quite a few personal friends whose children have had life changing experiences with medication. I have resisted it for my child because I see that he doesn't have a clear ADHD behavior pattern and doesn't have issues academically, but he's definitely on the fence. But he has also gotten much much better as he aged, which reinforces the idea that I was right to eschew medication for him.
My biggest problem with prescribing medication is that all of my friends children were prescribed medication, but none of them were told by the doctors what the plan was to remove them off of it. None. Without any guidance on how my child gets off ADHD medication or a reevaluation whether they need it, how can I trust the initial diagnosis?
Regardless of the history of the condition or how the original diagnostic criteria were developed it's widely accepted that ADHD is a neurological (neurodevelopmental) disorder -- i.e. not a psychological one.
For the record, to fill in the gaps, ADD and ADHD were treated as separate but related conditions for some time, but eventually were merged under ADHD (in DSM IV?) a bit like that other spectrum disorder.
> This is the reason why ADHD isn't the same as other mental health issues, because it was empirically determined instead of finding an actual issue
No, it's not. ADHD isn't the same as other "mental health issues" because it's a different one to the other ones.
> none of them were told by the doctors what the plan was to remove them off of it. None. Without any guidance on how my child gets off ADHD medication or a reevaluation whether they need it, how can I trust the initial diagnosis?
I don't see the logic here. Trust in the diagnosis stems from trust in the diagnostician.
You try it and see if it helps (if you think it could)? If it helps keep using it. If it doesn't work, try something else (medication or not). If there are unwanted side effects, balance the pros and cons.
Stimulants for ADHD aren't like 80s cartoon drug pusher pills. They also aren't like SSRIs et al. or lithium or anti-psychotics or something where there is pressure from the medical people to stay on it (or get put away).
The biggest problem with ADHD is that many kids who are diagnosed with ADHD eventually grow out of it. Your method is to keep medicating them permanently, with no thought or strategy as to how to evaluate whether or not they still need it.
And yes, all of the stimulants taken during their formative years has a tremendous effect on them as they get older. It changes their brain. This isn't sugar tablets they're taking.
https://archive.is/uCdV7
> The actual reason why America is an outlier is widespread over-diagnosis.
> A typical ADHD diagnosis in America is done by a paediatrician or a family doctor in an office visit as brief as 15 minutes. The norm in Europe is an hours-long assessment by a psychiatrist.
Anecdotal evidence, but our experience is — and most people/teachers/doctors we talk to say — that most diagnosis are done via similar long tests.
I’ve not heard of doctors/teachers trying to address ADHD without a formal test being done.
Are others able to confirm that they know of diagnosis from a “15 minute doctor visit”?
EDIT: In fact, our insurance won’t even cover medication for our son without a formal checkup — every 3 months.
Sure, some may “unofficially” think or claim to have ADHD from talking to their doctor that may say something like “it’s possible you/your child has ADHD”, but I find it hard to believe that actual treatment/IEP (individual education plan) happens without a formal diagnosis.
Similar to another poster. Our 6 year old was just diagnosed with it.
The formal test was a short survey about our childs behavior in various situations. It was highly subjective with questions similar to "My child has difficulty sitting still" (Never, Sometimes, Often).
There was not example of what is considered sometimes or often and what is age appropriate for a 6 year old.
The survey was required to be answered by the parents and kindergarten teacher. That was all that was necessary to have the option of medication.
Even more surprising is that with only slight more effort we now have the option to put our child on an IEP (indivdualized education plan) where there will now be a full additional teacher in the classroom assisting her.
Overall it has been an eye opening experience. Compared to our first child, our 6 year old is more spirited, but is not violent or defiant. She is mostly concerned with her own interests and will admittedly have difficulty focusing for long periods of time. I would be very curious if her behavior is above the threshold for ADHD in other countries.
This was just our experience and it is very possible that our child was an obvious case so further analysis was not necessary. For now we have opted not to use medication. Interestingly our diagnosing pediatrician has two children with ADHD and said that they put both children on medication at 6 years old.
> My child has difficulty sitting still
This is like every 6 year old lol. I bet you I would have been diagnosed with ADHD if I was tested, but in truth I was just an active kid who didn’t like sitting in a classroom chair all day.
There is definitely a difference between ADHD not sitting still and normal kid not sitting still.
My kid was continuously falling off his chair because he was creating a tension bridge between his chest on the edge of the table and his feet on the seat of his chair.
It was driving his kindergarten teacher crazy lol.
Related: it was a 15 minute doctor visit for us, but both me and my wife have ADHD so the doctor looked at the survey and said "boy howdy, I think you guys know what you are talking about"
Yes, I have such a diagnosis and can confirm this, but it was many years ago. I assume it's still the same.
I got a short quiz to see what symptoms I was complaining about and then I got asked about my drug usage and why I was seeing them.
I told them that I tried a friend's adderall once and I felt so much better immediately.
They told me drinking 2 pots of coffee a day, doing tasks out of order, "just in time laundry", and being "excitable" is actually ADHD and that I'd be better off if I took these pills every day and cut way back on the caffeine.
It took about 15 minutes.
What other questions would you have? Do you think you'd need to give me the long-form test? Lol.
I followed the advice btw. It's going well many years later and I hope RFK doesn't take the stimulants away.
In california (and i would have guessed nationally) at least you do need a long form test in order to get control prescription like adderall. But the test is more of a "video game" style that tests your attention
This? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WqoMrCLl14E
Feels kind of reductive.
If I played too many video games so now I don't get to have my meds, I'm going to be pretty sad.
> drinking two pots of coffee a day
Adult diagnosis is weird. I’m assuming you were not a child drinking that much coffee. Adults have decades of coping mechanisms obscuring the signal, and yet just talking to an adult with ADHD for an hour will tell you whether the person has ADHD instead of being a stimulant junkie that read the DSM to present manufactured symptoms. It’s exhausting to talk to someone with ADHD for hours if you don’t have exactly the right disposition (like being a polymath or having it too).
They will still often want you to do a sleep study, because chronic lack of quality sleep or chronic stress looks a hell of a lot like ADHD. It’s also why you want the person with ADHD to write or at least copy edit your emergency procedures because they haven’t just adopted chaos, they were born in it, molded by it. They were adults before they ever saw order and to them it was just blinding. They will absolutely write a procedure that won’t skip steps or overly rely on the actors to be calm and present of mind to pull it off.
This is wild. It took me ~20 years as an adult to get diagnosed because I couldn’t get my shit together to keep going back to neuro-psychiatrists to progress through the testing pipeline.
In my ten years as a teacher, I've had just one student whose pediatrician prescribed ADHD meds, much to the alarm of my colleagues. Typically, an ADHD diagnosis is the result of either a full neuropsychological evaluation, which requires several visits with a clinical psychologist and extensive observation forms for teachers and parents to complete.
Correct. In my experience it's the reason many kids don't have medication. The parents can't afford the testing.
At my university I know at least one person who intentionally tested positive soley for profit - the drugs sold/sell for huge markups, especially around exam time.
No idea what all it entailed other than the fact that they're unable to screen people out when I assume there are probably quite a lot of people doing or trying to do what he did.
So the process can't be especially rigorous.
It's possible the process is tuned to make sure most people who need it can get it even if that means some people can abuse the system and their fellow people.
Barely. I am diagnosed and it is difficult to get. If there is a shortage I just get the shaft. If I try to renew early I get put on a list. The amount of appointments and follow up calls required is like putting stairs in front of a wheelchair store.
>Are others able to confirm that they know of diagnosis from a “15 minute doctor visit”?
Yes, I got mine this way. Telehealth during Covid was notorious for this, but lot of NP/PA offices now do the same thing, just with a single in person visit.
But did the diagnosis result in any sort of ongoing treatment (e.g. medication, formal school/work adjustments, etc.)?
It may be personal, and you don’t have to answer, but this is the general question I have to these 15-minute diagnosis.
Yeah I got a prescription. IMO, these are pill farms. Everyone talks about how the medical industry is so driven by money, but somehow when it comes to mental health, people seem to shrug off the fact that everyone from the pharma companies down to the doctors office stands to make money by diagnosing and prescribing.
I think tribal and political social media discourse has exacerbated this effect, by which I mean, blanket acceptance of the ADHD diagnosis process and medication is now left-coded.
Conspiracy theorist anti-vax types exhibit "Big Pharma" skepticism, so media and pundits take great care to remind people of this. They want them to believe that they're picking a side in tribal politics.
edit: Another way it becomes left-coded is exhibited in this thread: victimization and grievance politics.
Anecdote - I'm in no way antivax or auth right but I still have a very strong skepticism to big pharma and corruption in general. I think about Purdue pharma often and how they showed just how much money you can print with some bribery and a sociopathic disregard for human life. Killing Americans is big (and shockingly safe) business if you cut the right folks in and do it at large scale!
Not parent, but yes I got medication. The work adjustments were me meeting deadlines, not procrastinating, being able to focus on one task at a time, etc. Absolute game changer. For some of us, it's completely obvious. Some, less so.
Adult me had a therapist visit for anxiety, after an hour with the first guy he said that he suspects mild ADHD, but it would need to be confirmed by someone else and it wasn’t something he would prescribe anything for in the mean time. No idea what is next but most of this is outside my budget currently so it’s on hold. Doesn’t seem easy to get a confirmation in my experience
Adult assessments take 4+ hours and cost $2500. It kinda sucks, but hopefully you have insurance.
I have two children diagnosed with ADHD. The first was acting so erratic in class that he ended up missing four weeks of school because they kept sending him home. The doctors suspected ADHD, but refused to diagnose it without going through the full process. Short-term therapy, then long-term therapy followed by a psychiatric review. Once he got medication everything went back to normal.
We just started the evaluation with our second child and it's the exact same process. Not that I doubt some doctors cut corners, but I haven't personally seen it.
This was our experience with our daughter about a decade ago. Her school required a diagnostic test that took several hours and cost several thousand dollars.
$1k/hr? Was it on a private jet?
Heh, welcome to the US
It’s the click on the letter test supervised by a psychiatrist for my diagnosis.
Formal diagnosis is a joke.
It took me 15 minutes, thank God, because seeing a psychologist and psychiatrist would have taken 18 months and cost me much more for something I obviously have.
Back in the 1970s I had a bed wetting problem. They tried a medication called Ritalin to address this problem. This medication had an interesting side effect of making me pleasant to be around for the first time in my life. Both my parents and all of my teachers remarked on how much better I was able to pay attention and be kind to other people. Then they took me off the medication and I reverted to my wild ways. I don't think many or any people had heard of ADHD back then, so it didn't occur to anyone to try to medicate me for what I clearly had. Over the decades I've learned to cope with ADHD without medication, but I can't help but wonder how much better my life would have been if I had been able to concentrate and not been so hyperactive. Maybe I would have done better in school and had friends.
Even today, I wonder if I should go through the trouble of being diagnosed and getting on medication. The last three days I wasted my time instead of doing the work my company pays me to do and got exactly nothing done. The entire time I kept thinking, "I really should do that work so I can keep my job and provide for me family" but I couldn't concentrate and procrastinated day after day.
Most of my children have ADHD. Before they could be diagnosed, they did have to go through extensive testing by a psychiatrist and there were interviews conducted with us as their parents and with their teachers. The 15 minute diagnosis mentioned in the article has not been my experience. We have regular meetings (every 6-8 weeks) with the psychiatrist to evaluate their dosage and how things are going.
> but I couldn't concentrate and procrastinated day after day
Please make sure to take care of yourself and try going through with the diagnosis. What you described is very similar to what I was going through - severe procrastination which resulted in worse and worse performance at work, eventually I had to quit my job because of it. Later I’ve learned procrastination of this magnitude is basically your subconscious screaming at you that something is not right and you should be taking care of yourself instead of forcing yourself to work.
On a side note - ADHD is hereditary so if your children have it there’s a good chance you and/or your SO have it too.
Hey! I got diagnosed with ADHD last year as an adult and getting diagnosed and medicated has been a massive improvement in my quality of life. If you have the energy to do it, I would strongly recommend it. The medication is great—I have far fewer "stare at the wall, bounce in my seat, get nothing done" days—but I also appreciate having a concrete diagnosis. Even after decades of assuming I had it, it felt good to actually hear it from a doctor for some reason.
> Even today, I wonder if I should go through the trouble of being diagnosed and getting on medication
Maybe talk to people diagnosed with ADHD as adults? Of my acquaintances like that, they mention an immediate improvement. The benefits were very obvious to them.
It is almost as if we should test for ADHD by just testing amphetamines in questionable situations and just seeing if people respond well?
Likely very questionable advice, but if you are a risk-taking type then maybe score something and just test it on yourself? Try to be scientific of course. And try to understand the risks (which you need to understand even if you were diagnosed by the medical system).
I had a bedwetting problem too. It was awful and tormenting, when visiting friends I had to bring clothes and sleep on the floor. Male puberty solved it almost to the day. All of a sudden it was gone and what a relief that was. I think it was just training the lizard brain to hold things a little tighter during sleep, or until then the nerve pathways were not supple enough.
> A typical ADHD diagnosis in America is done by a paediatrician or a family doctor in an office visit as brief as 15 minutes.
I'm in my 30s, and in the process of receiving a diagnosis after it had been suggested to me my entire life by teachers, colleagues, and friends. I avoided diagnosis and medication mainly because I was skeptical of the safety record of medications -- probably because that's why my parents never sought a diagnosis for me when I was younger.
After doing more research the past few years, I learned that ADHD medications are the success story of medical management of psychiatric illness, and they have a strong safety record
In any case, for me so far it has involved four (4) 2-hour appointments with a clinician, having trusted colleagues and close friends fill out detailed "external rater" forms in which they rated my executive dysfunction, and (yesterday) a marathon 4-hour long testing session in which I took a sequence of standardized tests under the supervision of a clinician.
I know that diagnosis of ADHD in children is a different animal, and even for adults there are clinics that provide a diagnosis and prescription in a half hour or so -- but not everyone with ADHD is diagnosed after a single 30 minute session with a provider. And contrary to another sibling comment, there are fairly robust objective metrics for identifying the hallmark features of ADHD and executive dysfunction.
> there are fairly robust objective metrics for identifying the hallmark features of ADHD and executive dysfunction
What are they?
If you are truly interested, these can be found with a quick search query -- I won't do that here for you.
But you will find that ADHD is one of the most widely studied psychiatric illnesses with strong neurobiological basis and well known measurable correlates, and as I mentioned, has the highest response rates to medication for a psychiatric condition. So you should have no trouble finding out more!
No, a description of ADHD features is easy to find, but not "robust metrics".
When searching specifically for metrics used in diagnosis, some choice words come up from med central:
"A challenge with diagnosing ADHD is that the characteristics associated with the disorder – such as difficulties with focusing, shifting/dividing attention, managing frustration, organization/poor time-management, working memory, and staying engaged – are common symptoms that could have a breadth of etiologies.
As noted, *more often than not*, ADHD coincides with another disorder. "
Then for narrow-band symptoms will list examples of neuropsychological measures like D-KEFS, and finding details for each of these is again like pulling teeth. But looking at the description, all of what is tested could be impacted by other issues, including instability in home life, lifestyle factors, anxiety and depression, insomnia, etc
> Few things agitate Robert F. Kennedy junior, America’s new health secretary, more than the rate of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) among American children. And for good reason
I'm sorry, let me stop you there. What in the world are you talking about? The government's main guy looking after America's health is obsessed with ADHD diagnosis rates -- for good reason? That is absolute madness. Got nothing better to do, I guess. No infinitely long tail of the global pandemic that was ravaging the population a couple of years ago? The threat of bird flu? Dare I mention health insurance?
I can't read the article, but I can say (a) that Americans are generally much less opposed than Europeans to treating mental disorders through medication, and (b) the best available information tells us that ADHD is underdiagnosed, not overdiagnosed, even in America.
The moral hazard is pretty clear. Testing is profitable and so are the drugs. If they are wrong, there is no penalty. For the same reason an optometrist lied about my perfect vision as a child and conned my parents into glasses I never used paid for by insurance.
Remember doctors are there to advise not to command, know the hazards and be willing to say no or consider the data from your own perspective.
I like to tell people if you go to a carpenter to build a table, you'll get a wooden table. If you go to a stone cutter, you'll get a marble table. If you go to a welder, you'll get a metal table.
The trick is to know who to go to get what you want. In the USA with PPO there is generally zero friction to just making yourself an appointment with a speciality doctor and that specialty doctor will use his "toolbox" to create the outcome that you came to him and paid for. If you go to a psychiatrist, well their tool is prescription medicine, so that is what they'll use.
This sounds like common sense, but i think the population at large places too much trust in the doctor. In the US you have to be your own advocate.
An idle idea I’ve had is that the healthcare bureaucracy in the U.S. can get so bad that one wishes one can hire a lawyer-type of role to navigate it as a paperwork proxy of sorts. But perhaps greater scope is needed- a personal medical advisor who has the domain knowledge, while being independent of the incentives that drive others in the health system.
I suppose in the past that would just be your family doctor, wasn’t it.
> Testing is profitable and so are the drugs.
Amphetamine salts (generic for Adderall) cost less than $20 a month. Generic atomoxetine is $15.
The medication for ADHD is _cheap_. A pharmacy will likely get more profit from a bottle of ibuprofen.
Maybe this varies but people I know with adhd had to see or beg a doc every 6 months to renew a script, which is a money generator for the doctor.
The gross margin on amphetamine salts even at $20 must be insanely high. We're talking about what, a couple grams of active amphetamines in a month?
Doctors in the US do not suffer for the lack of patients. In most cases, psychiatrists are booked for months in advance. A lot of ADHD med prescription renewals are now handled by nurse practitioners as a result.
It's literally a 5-minute call: "Do you have any unusual side effects? How would you rate your depression/anxiety? OK, the prescription was sent to your pharmacy".
> The gross margin on amphetamine salts even at $20 must be insanely high. We're talking about what, a couple grams of active amphetamines in a month?
This is about as low as drug prices go in the US. And for amphetamines there's an additional overhead of having a pharmacist checking your ID, storing the drug in a safe overnight, filling out the DEA forms (for every link in the supply chain), etc.
Good Rx shows the price for amphetamine salts at $15 now (in Walgreens in my area).
I can definitely tell that the profit basis for ADHD diagnoses is just not there. There isn't much money in it for doctors or pharmacies.
Because what used to be a generic indicator of distracted early childhoods (whether by nutrition, environment, weird parenting) got a new name.
And it is no coincidence or surprise that brain stimulants like amphetamines dominated the first wave of treatment. People 'perform' better on amphetamines, always have. They work so long as you concentrate on the short term and ignore long term issues like increasing tolerance, increasing demand and ultimately schizophrenia from chronic deep sleep deprivation.
Is it possible to develop schizophrenia from sleep deprivation? I always thought it would be acute psychosis.
“America’s ethos of “school achievement above all else” is part of the problem, says Stephen Hinshaw of the University of California at Berkeley”
This may be the ethos in elite circles but I don’t think it’s the case in general.
If anything the arms-race of competitive rec sports seems to be given a higher priority.
Scott Alexander's views on Adderall prescriptions (for ADHD) is a good read: https://slatestarcodex.com/2017/12/28/adderall-risks-much-mo...
This blog post was what convinced me to actually get on the ADHD meds. And yep, getting the prescription was ridiculously easy.
The downsides are just not very downsidey, but the upsides are quite real for many people.
Curious if you believe you have ADHD (obviously you're prescribed so you "have" it per someone's assessment)
If you don't believe you have it, was this why you didn't previously consider taking performance-enhancing drugs?
I have always had ADHD, but I had zero access to mental health care when growing up. I was lucky because I'm really good at math (including competition-style math) and computer science, so it did not cause a _lot_ of issues at that time.
Over time, I adapted on my own. E.g. by buying several sets of things like scissors and screwdrivers so that I don't end up misplacing _all_ of them. Or by structuring the work so that I can switch attention between high-priority tasks.
> If you don't believe you have it, was this why you didn't previously consider taking performance-enhancing drugs?
I was really apprehensive about using mind-altering drugs, and amphetamines always sounded pretty scary.
On a more philosophical basis, should performance-enhancing drugs be available more widely anyway, with appropriate safeguards against abuse?
> On a more philosophical basis, should performance-enhancing drugs be available more widely anyway, with appropriate safeguards against abuse?
I recently came across this article discussing a study which found that stimulants lower productivity in people without ADHD.
> “Our results suggest that these drugs don’t actually make you ‘smarter’,” said Bossaerts. “Because of the dopamine the drugs induce, we expected to see increased motivation, and they do motivate one to try harder. However, we discovered that this exertion caused more erratic thinking — in ways that we could make precise because the knapsack task had been widely studied in computer science.
> “Our research shows drugs that are expected to improve cognitive performance in patients may actually be leading to healthy users working harder while producing a lower quality of work in a longer amount of time,” said Bowman.
https://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/smart-drugs-can-decrease...
This study had just 40 participants and the study design was not great.
But I agree, that's a good argument against drugs.
Fair to say for an adult.
I question even calling it an "over" diagnosis, when its not even clear that the diagnosis has any non-socially constructed objective metrics by which we can call that diagnosis accurate.
Are you suggesting the condition isn't real? Or that the diagnostic criteria are entirely subjective?
The diagnostic criteria is entirely subjective. "Often loses thigns", "Often doesn't pay attention" isn't exactly objective. How do we even know what "often" is?
But more than that what is the condition, if the only means we have of defining it is a subjective biased interpretation by an individual?
I am sure there are differences in brain chemistry that make one more stimulated, more long term goal oriented, and etc, but given the complexity of the human brain, and our lack of understanding/tools to measure, its not clear to me we should be so sure given any patients failure can be directly attributed to a singular condition.
So much of psychiatry is like this, though. There are the extreme conditions where everybody agrees "yes, something is wrong with his brain," or "clearly his mind was broken by circumstances and now he needs help," or "that's the most severe case of autism I've ever seen," but there are also more nebulous conditions: anxiety, depression, AD(H)D, autism spectrum, personality disorders, etc.
This isn't to say that those conditions aren't precisely defined or that they aren't real, but they might be at least partially a product of our society.
Your skepticism about whether an issue "can be directly attributed to a singular condition" is just good medicine. As conditions are studied more, often it's discovered that it's actually a few different conditions that share some symptoms. Maybe all of these sometimes wishy-washy "we didn't have this when I was a kid" conditions are just medicine learning more about the mind.
Fundamentally we want to be adapted to our environment. As the conditions for success change, what was prior adaptive is now maladaptive disorder. Being institutionalized in a school after spending hundreds of thousands/millions years out in nature/fighting/hunting/building shelter has consequences.
Much of disorder is likely just maladaptive for, as uncle Ted put it, the post industrial revolution.
> Maybe all of these sometimes wishy-washy "we didn't have this when I was a kid" conditions are just medicine learning more about the mind.
I think it's likely that as well as a healthy dose of "the world was way different when I was a kid, and didn't have as much of X, Y, Z, which contribute to the formation of maladaptive neurological patterns"
I have ADHD (diagnosed ~28 years ago, so well before "it was cool"), and honestly might kind of agree with you in that it could easily be a collection of neurodivergences that just get labelled ADHD. Add to that, lots of overlap with Autism spectrum[1], which probably has the same issue, and likely leads to misdiagnosis of one vs. the other, comorbid diagnosis, and the blunt categorization of neurological conditions which could very well be distinct, and at the very least sometimes have very different collections of symptoms into broader "ADHD" and/or "autism" categories.
[1]: https://neurodivergentinsights.com/misdiagnosis-monday/adhd-...
Yes, and at the end of the day, these diagnosis aren't there to pathologize people, but to actually provide help, even if critics don't believe so.
This is something you only understand if you dealt with neurodivergent people. Suddenly it all makes sense, once you learn that their brains filter and process information in a somewhat different way, resulting in all kinds of different observable symptoms.
They used the TOVA test to diagnose mine. It measures what part of the attention paradigm may be deficient or overactive. AFAIK that test isn’t purely subjective.
I heard of this. My immediate criticism, is that even those with diagnosed ADHD aren't just deficient in focus/attention and impulsive in all aspects of their lives. They can drive a car, play video games, read subjects they are interested in, have long conversations, etc. That is to say, focus/attention/arousal are rather complex phenomenons that vary greatly based on circumstances, and aren't simple numbers we can say one is deficient in.
Testing someone in a completely artificial environment (sitting in an office during a diagnosis playing some tasks clicking on a computer screen) is hard for me to believe is exactly an accurate metric for revealing any of these things. Most especially, when a lot of people are actively seeking this diagnosis, and are motivated to alter their behavior to get the result they are looking for.
Im really curious how this company decided these tests are accurate at all. I assume they did some studies to find some variability in the test results and those who were already diagnosed and then determined those variability were indicative of ADHD. So what test is really doing IMO is just reinforcing the standard diagnostic criteria.
People with ADHD actually have an increased risk of motorvehicle accidents, and don't perform as well in certain kinds of games compared to people who don't have ADHD (when you account for experience playing video games etc). The TOVA test is essentially a simple video game -- it's a computerized test that checks reaction times to a targeted stimulus that appears on a computer screen. There are different classes of error that correspond to different kinds of executive dysfunction
You are right that attention is a complex phenomenon, but keep in mind that people who evaluate ADHD are aware of the limitations -- that is why TOVA isn't typically the only mechanism used for diagnosis. ADHD evaluation often involves multiple sessions in which other possible explanations are ruled out or explored, along with questionnaires from friends and family who know the person -- incidentally some of the questions on the ones I collected from my friends/family were about my driving!
Even with this, there are still limitations, but there's no need to throw the baby out with the bathwater -- the goal is to produce an actionable explanation that we can use to reduce suffering, and for many people this explanation does exactly that.
>Even with this, there are still limitations, but there's no need to throw the baby out with the bathwater -- the goal is to produce an actionable explanation that we can use to reduce suffering, and for many people this explanation does exactly that.
So did shamens, tarot readers, and psychics. The "actionable" part of all this is prescribing stimulants. Why can't we just focus on prescribing stimulants to those who would benefit from stimulants? Is the "ADHD" part of it really necessary?
The actionable part includes stimulants, but also self-awareness and structure. Stimulants alone won't usually lead to the kinds of changes that improve quality of life. Virtually any clinician and expert on this topic agrees with this point
I don't understand your question about whether or not the "ADHD" part is necessary. Yes, we should have words for complex ideas.
The comparison to shamans and tarot readers comes off as dismissive and uninformed, and generally in poor taste. Ultimately you are questioning a diagnostic framework that you don't understand very well given your other comments. There are critiques to be made and even aspects of your position that I agree with but you really need to understand the framework you intend to tear down before tearing it down
My point is giving people any explanation for their problems - so long as its backed by authority helps them - it says nothing to the truthfulness of those explanations.
Anyway youre being really dismissive too instead of just responding to my points. If you think Im being dumb fine Im just not interested in an emotionally heated argument.
I apologize if I seem dismissive of people's mental health - not my intention Ive been dealing with them my whole life. Take care.
>People with ADHD actually have an increased risk of motorvehicle accidents,
Does this mean that you identified a definite cause, or does this mean as part of an ADHD diagnosis, you managed to capture a group of individuals with specific traits like being more impulsive, taking higher risks, etc?
I can for example, make up 9 seemingly related symptoms, and given a large enough population millions of people will fit it. Then I assure you I can do a wide range of studies that will find that my group of people will deviate from the norm in X,Y,Z.
Also weirdly enough, I noticed I make a lot more mistakes while driving while on adderall.
I'm not sure what your point is -- but you might look into Chesterton's fence. It's a metaphor that illustrates a common trap that lots of smart people fall into.
Is this like the sophisticated version of negging? I think itd have been easier to just give me few worss to look into.
I bought into the whole "I have Adhd thing thats why Im failing at school" thing 13 years ago and have since then spent countless hours thinking and talking about it.
Im glad it helps people, but unless someone can prove definitive facts about my brain, I have all the answers I need as to why I am who I am or why I do what I do. And yes stimulants help sometimes when Im forced to do shit I have zero interest in for prolonged periods of time, simple as that
There are indeed several widely used objective metrics that can be used to identify hallmark symptoms of ADHD. The difficult part isn't really identifying those symptoms so much as distinguishing from other conditions that can cause many similar symptoms. But OP is not correct in suggesting that there aren't objective metrics -- ADHD probably has more of these than any other psychiatric illness.
In any case, I still think of ADHD and a lot of psychiatric diagnoses as models. We try to make these models useful to relieve suffering. They are far from perfect, but it doesn't make sense to throw the baby out with the bathwater and discount the many people who have been helped
>But OP is not correct in suggesting that there aren't objective metrics -- ADHD probably has more of these than any other psychiatric illness.
What am I missing?
>In any case, I still think of ADHD and a lot of psychiatric diagnoses as models. We try to make these models useful to relieve suffering. They are far from perfect, but it doesn't make sense to throw the baby out with the bathwater and discount the many people who have been helped
This is what it keeps getting down to every time I have this discussion. But I really feel like the discourse is hindering having an deeper understanding of the topic. The mental model and the resulting language, like people saying "I HAVE X,Y,Z" seems to be somewhat philosophically askew. Everything I read seems to point more to "X is a real objective thing, and were trying to find better ways of diagnosing it", rather than "X is what we call these assortment of symptoms alot of patients seem to exhibit which is helped by Y"
From a patient standpoint I think its a monumental difference with people saying things like "I am like Y because I HAVE X", as if X, what was the observed collection of (possibly unrelated) symptoms, now being a cause in itself.
RE what you are missing -- from your other comments I feel you haven't done much prior reading on the topic. There's lots out there, so go for it!
There has been lots and lots of writing on the phenomenology of mental illness and modern mental health culture. There is lots to not like: for instance it tends to encourage excessive rumination and negative feedback loops and over-identification with these designations, as you say. This is why I prefer to think of my diagnoses as models -- they are approximate descriptions of my behavior, and the treatments prescribed are also approximations, and it's up to me to use these as tools to improve my life. But you might enjoy reading some prior art on the topic
But in any case, if the tools aren't useful, then discard them -- I was diagnosed with PTSD in my early 20s, and at the time it was a tremendously helpful and eye-opening -- it hadn't occurred to me that the violence I experienced was impacting me so many years later, but when someone pointed it out to me, I was able to adjust the ways I related to myself and other people, and for the most part, my symptoms are in remission today. I no longer think of myself as "someone with PTSD" -- it's no longer a helpful lens through which I can understand myself
Perhaps you’d find Stephen Grossbergs models on how the ADHD brain processes information interesting. I can’t disagree that ADHD might be too wide an umbrella and I find the medicine is best taken on an as needed basis to augment other coping mechanisms.
There are defined diagnostic criteria but those are somewhat arbitrary, and evaluation of those criteria is highly subjective. Different clinicians often assign different diagnoses to the same patient. There are probably multiple different underlying pathologies that cause ADHD symptoms.
https://peterattiamd.com/trennasutcliffe/
There’s a common suggestion that the condition isn’t real for a whole lot of diagnosed people. Schools are prisons and perhaps being bad at being forced to sit through long and unengaging education isn’t a disease. A kid being bored and preferring to run around outside isn’t a disorder.
It's weird, I'm sure I have ADHD but it's very hard to get a diagnosis. Several of my friends have it and I'm exactly the same as them. I'm not in America though (very thankful for that considering what's happening there now)
There are newer, non-amphetamine drugs for treating ADHD like Strattera, an SNRI (Selective Norepinephrine Re-uptake Inhibitor). It will be interesting to see what happens if and when these drugs displace the amphetamines (the current front-line treatment for ADHD) to the point that getting a prescription for Adderall or Vyvanse or some other form of medicinal speed because you have (or think you have) ADHD becomes difficult or impossible.
Why would that be a desirable state of affairs? Drugs have varying effects on people, including side effects. Making it difficult to get prescription for stimulants guarantees that a lot of people with ADHD (it seems like 50% don't respond to Strattera) won't have access to medication that would help them.
> Why would that be a desirable state of affairs?
You can't see why an ADHD diagnosis (which isn't hard to get) no longer being a quick ticket to getting amphetamines--one of the most commonly sought-after and regularly abused class drugs since the 1930s--would be a desirable state of affairs? Are you not aware of the adverse health affects they have (cardiovascular, neurological, e.g., Parkinson's, dental, bone density)?
> it seems like 50% don't respond to Strattera
It's seems more like people take longer to respond to Strattera and either don't want to wait, or just want the amphetamines.
Have you seen their parents?
[flagged]
Undiagnosed ADHD-PI/-C ruined my life from childhood, teenage years, and early adulthood. I blame by ignorant, opinionated father for espousing conspiracy theories.
I myself was diagnosed twice. I don't have it, at all. Notwithstanding any perverse incentive to diagnose, the process itself is not stringent and borders on pseudo-scientific. It's not to say ADHD doesn't exist, but that they (psychiatrists) egregiously cast too wide a net.
You might ask how I know I don't have it. No one really cared about other symptoms I exhibited: chronic insomnia foremost, and some anxiety. Once I got a handle on that with non-pharmaceutical interventions, my focus was fine.
And to the extent that insomnia was given any credence, it's to push pills. Generously you could say practitioners default to that because it's so often demanded by clientele, they want to just press a button to make problems go away. But they just don't bother giving you an alternative.
edit: would also mention, the first time I was diagnosed as a young child was because I was a bored daydreamer who didn't always pay attention to the teacher. This is what we're treating as a weakness to be rooted out.
Can’t read the article even with archive.org. Can someone share it somewhere?
https://archive.is/uCdV7
Thanks, I was trying to use the Wayback machine but I couldn’t see the article.
The Wayback Machine seems to save the page as it sees it while Archive.Today seems to use some extensions to bypass paywalls and things like that.
[flagged]
Ok, but can you please not fulminate on Hacker News? This is in the site guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
It's hard to tell what your diatribe is actually in support of. Is it overprescription that is predatory capitalist BS, or somehow skepticism of this entire process?
[flagged]
[flagged]
My kid's psychiatrist said that ADHD isn't a "real" disorder in the same way that other mental health issues are. He told us (I'm paraphrasing and I might get some terminology wrong) that back in the 70s, psychiatrists and psychologists noticed a lot of kids were hyperactive or having trouble behaving in class. They studied it and came up with a list of 10+ symptoms they could associate with this, and then they worked backwards and said "If the child has 5 out of these symptoms then they have ADHD." (I think it was called ADD at the time) The reason why they chose 5 is because if they chose 4 then too many kids would be diagnosed with it, and if they chose 6 then too little children would be diagnosed. So they settled on 5 because 15% of the kids could be diagnosed with this.
This is the reason why ADHD isn't the same as other mental health issues, because it was empirically determined instead of finding an actual issue like depression or borderline personality disorder, etc. This is also why there is such a large leeway in being diagnosed with ADHD and why it's overdiagnosed.
This isn't to say that many kids don't need medication to help them concentrate in school and to achieve academically, or to control their behavior. We have quite a few personal friends whose children have had life changing experiences with medication. I have resisted it for my child because I see that he doesn't have a clear ADHD behavior pattern and doesn't have issues academically, but he's definitely on the fence. But he has also gotten much much better as he aged, which reinforces the idea that I was right to eschew medication for him.
My biggest problem with prescribing medication is that all of my friends children were prescribed medication, but none of them were told by the doctors what the plan was to remove them off of it. None. Without any guidance on how my child gets off ADHD medication or a reevaluation whether they need it, how can I trust the initial diagnosis?
Regardless of the history of the condition or how the original diagnostic criteria were developed it's widely accepted that ADHD is a neurological (neurodevelopmental) disorder -- i.e. not a psychological one. For the record, to fill in the gaps, ADD and ADHD were treated as separate but related conditions for some time, but eventually were merged under ADHD (in DSM IV?) a bit like that other spectrum disorder.
> This is the reason why ADHD isn't the same as other mental health issues, because it was empirically determined instead of finding an actual issue
No, it's not. ADHD isn't the same as other "mental health issues" because it's a different one to the other ones.
> none of them were told by the doctors what the plan was to remove them off of it. None. Without any guidance on how my child gets off ADHD medication or a reevaluation whether they need it, how can I trust the initial diagnosis?
I don't see the logic here. Trust in the diagnosis stems from trust in the diagnostician. You try it and see if it helps (if you think it could)? If it helps keep using it. If it doesn't work, try something else (medication or not). If there are unwanted side effects, balance the pros and cons.
Stimulants for ADHD aren't like 80s cartoon drug pusher pills. They also aren't like SSRIs et al. or lithium or anti-psychotics or something where there is pressure from the medical people to stay on it (or get put away).
The biggest problem with ADHD is that many kids who are diagnosed with ADHD eventually grow out of it. Your method is to keep medicating them permanently, with no thought or strategy as to how to evaluate whether or not they still need it.
And yes, all of the stimulants taken during their formative years has a tremendous effect on them as they get older. It changes their brain. This isn't sugar tablets they're taking.
Would like if there were an actual history book to verify this.