No parrot can cogitate to such an extent, let alone relay such notions to a human. We know it's you, bud.
Didn't watch the whole thing, but if Carl Hart actually stated that adderall and meth are the same thing, he's wrong. And I doubt that he did, because Hart is a leading figure in the industry. Going along with that, he's also controversial and has a very non-conventional viewpoint on things like drug addiction, which makes any mistake, however small, a hug deal. His opponents would have a field day with it.
Adderall is composed of two general compounds which are both amphetamine, but which break down into four amphetamine salts. It's a mystery to me why they chose these four specific salts, but I do have a theory. One of the two general compounds that compose adderall can be thought of in a general sense as more stimulating, the other more rewarding. They're both amphetamine, they're just re-arranged in space differently.
Amphetamine use can be maintained for a long time if it's prescribed and one doesn't abuse it, gets sleep, eats, socializes, and does everything else that a normal healthy person should. Use it typically at or below 60mg per day. It's not benign even at or below 60mg/day, in fact it may in fact be toxic at just about any dose, but it isn't likely to cause rapid degeneration at that dose either, assuming one take care of themself.
Meth is a lot more toxic than amphetamine, and I'm under the impression that it's roughly twice as potent. Even if you do everything you can to stay healthy, it will still damage your brain. It's also a lot more rewarding. And when people buy meth, they're usually buying super high doses. If we calculate that a maximum therapeutic dose of meth, based on that of amphetamine and the conversion ratio, is 30mg, then you can see how people tend to way overshoot that mark when they take meth for recreation. I mean tens of times more than the therapeutic dose.
They're definitely not the same, despite chemical similarity.
