← Back to context

Comment by pixel_popping

11 hours ago

Great article!

ADHD is way more complex than just an attention issue, I mean just the amount of average daydreaming and "rumination" and the constant multi-threading of thoughts... is just next level, I believe it's not properly explained to outsiders that might just think that X guy just have a hard time going in the flow but in reality it's much more catastrophic than this and will create many more mental health issues if left unmanaged.

Most ADHD people that have jumped on some sort of strong treatment (stimulants in general) are discovering a new world in pretty much 1 hour, the first time the mind goes "quiet" is incredible. I advise everyone to read more on this website https://www.adxs.org/en - it's also friendly to scrape to be used with LLMs.

ADHD isn't a good thing to have imo, it's a serious dysfunction and it's sad to see that it's being romanticized lately in social media or plainly discredited by some people/media, and while treated ADHD can make you productive "all the time", you end up addicted and pretty much permanently require drugs to function well.

I agree that ADHD is a serious condition for many people, and that it's overly romanticized and that isn't good when it comes to getting help for those that do need it.

To that point, I'm going push back on this language just a bit:

> you end up addicted and pretty much permanently require drugs to function well

That is negatively framing medication, which if taken properly as prescribed is no different than any other medication someone might take to help with a chronic health condition. It slightly encourages and leans into the idea that ADHD is "fixable" without medication and so taking medication is a problem (or due to a weakness, etc).

I'm not discounting the value of other forms of non-medical treatment, but in many case medication IS appropriate as part of the overall treatment that a person requires to manage their ADHD. We should not use language that stigmatizes treatment that should be between a person and their doctor.

  • Agree with original commenter but +1 to reframing the language. I was very afraid to begin medication because I would always hear about how addicting this medication can be. But like you say, you wouldn't tell someone with diabetes that they're addicted to insulin.

    • fully agreed with this. it's the same stigma that I see get applied to SSRIs - that you become 'dependent' on medication, it's not 'natural', etc

      in reality, if the side effects are minimal and you function better on it, it's a sip of water and a pill a day and that's largely it for health outcomes. most drug interventions are generally extremely well-studied with very large sample sizes. there's a reason why clinical research is considered gold-standard - the regulatory requirements to even get a drug to market is monumental and some of the most rigorously audited and vetted processes in the world

      the ironic thing is that most of the big pharma detractors are also ingesting dozens of supplements, the vast majority of which have little to no good empirical evidence backing them (and very small effect sizes to boot) along with even less regulatory oversight for issues like contamination, formulation, or if it even contains the active ingredient. which isn't to say that 'big pharma' doesn't often pursue avenues for profitability reasons instead of the public good but that's not the typical critique that an anti-empiricist brings most times

    • I'm addicted to several things. Like eyeglasses, and breathing.

      The difference the medication makes is similarly revelatory to putting on eyeglasses. Of course you never want to take them off.

      There's no withdrawal symptoms, per se, for most people, the addiction is purely psychological from "trying to drive with only 3 tires sucks"

      2 replies →

    • it's not good to flame people for things they can't control. I also think it's not fair to compare insulin (life saving non synthesizable hormone) vs amphetamine (hard drug that helps people better cope with a society expressly designed to beat them down), because then we forget that dosing amphetamines daily comes with its own price of damage to the body. drugs prescribed for adhd are also very much addicting - if one lets an amphetamine script run out, symptoms of withdrawal will take place, regardless as to how the condition is verbally labelled (which while horrible is also to me not fair to compare with a diabetic dying without insulin)

      1 reply →

  • I think it is also worth reframing what "functioning well" means. Society expects certain things of us and our brains function in a way that those things are more difficult. Is that our fault, or society, or some mix? Isn't it possible that society itself could adjust in such a way that people who naturally struggle to sit in a cubicle doing the same thing all day every day could be offered other options? Seems like our capitalistic system that requires "productive" work as measured by those who already control the capital is maybe also a problem here.

    I'm on stimulants and I agree that the post you responded to needed reframing. But I think we do ourselves and anyone else who isn't "normal" in body or mind a huge disservice just focusing on acceptance of treatment when there are larger societal changes that could be made.

    • I can't fix society. I can, however, take a pill that lets me hold down a job long enough to not fall into crippling debt.

> it's a serious dysfunction [...] treated ADHD can make you productive "all the time", you end up addicted and pretty much permanently require drugs to function well

On its own, its not "a serious dysfunction". Within the context of operating within the current societal setup for a paycheck that provides basic survival needs, yeah.

It allows me to sit down and do 'something' without being taken completely off task for the rest of the day because someone kept knocking on the door or reading a hostile/complaint email. What that 'something' is is not always 'productive' but now I can do it without everyday things or upcoming events throwing me in a completely different direction.

Meds helps with the alignment issue. If you are taking meds and its making you "productive all the time" and you find yourself addicted to it, I suggest talking to your doctor about that. I had to work with CBT just to form a habit of remembering to take the medication, and it took a few years before I finally started to remember regularly. I still forget on days that dont fit into that routine

> > you end up addicted and pretty much permanently require drugs to function well

No? First, even when I was taking it almost every day for three years, I kept forgetting to take it. Today, my last refill was in February this year.

I recommend against raw-dogging reality with ADHD without meds. At least so you have baseline "this is what normal feels like"

  • I think it's important to take it case-by-case. Many people with ADHD find stimulant medications positively life-changing. However, plenty of people with ADHD also have a substance use disorder. Sometimes medication is an effective treatment for both issues; other times it exacerbates the latter.

    Consider the subreddit r/stopspeeding, a recovery community for people addicted to stimulants. Many, many users share similar stories of being prescribed a stimulant medication for ADHD, then beginning to abuse it. Many of these people really do have ADHD, but find that their lives are better without stimulant medication.

> it's a serious dysfunction and it's sad to see that it's being romanticized lately in social media or plainly discredited by some people/media

The author of the article is contributing to this by using their medical diagnosis to "outsmart" the system for writing material. Presenting a proper ADHD assessment as merely an online test just adds fuel to the fire (and if this is the only interaction they had I am skeptical of the assessment procedure).

> and while treated ADHD can make you productive "all the time", you end up addicted and pretty much permanently require drugs to function well

That's an unfair and sweeping characterization of the immediate therapeutic benefits and long-term health outcomes of individuals.

  • Why assume malicious intent? I am well aware that the test isn’t just some Math.random() and even includes quotes from the official site that talk more about how their scoring engine works.

    I don’t think I was trying to “outsmart” anything, I’m just a naturally curious person

    • I don't think you had bad intentions. You may know the testing is more involved but there is a common perception that people can just do a single online test and get a diagnosis. People should be informed that it's just one indicator of many. I apologize for my "writing fodder" phrasing though, that was rude on my part.