• Neuroscience & Pharmacology Discussion Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Recent Journal Articles Chemistry Mega-Thread
    FREE Chemistry Databases! Self-Education Guide

  • N&PD Moderators: Skorpio

Whats is someone with the opposite of "A.D.D."?

G

gh0stmAn

Bluelighter
Joined
Jul 17, 2013
Messages
389
I wonder what you would call someone, that instead of someone with ADD who can't sit still and listen, the person welcomes others knowledge and listens with all his attention and then even after the lecture/book/article/whatever goes and looks into the subject even deeper to gain even more knowledge and wisdom? What would someone of this nature be called?
 
alternatively, a nerd.

but i don't understand what that has to do with advanced drug discussion (apart from the abbreviation).
 
OCD and ADHD are considered opposite ends of the attentive spectrum from a psychological perspective. I'm not sure how well that dichotomy holds up from a neurological viewpoint though, although ADD meds are usually not prescribed to OCD folks since they make the OCD worse:

http://www.currentpsychiatry.com/ho...gh-adhd/3f3ebacb62ebb5ed6528fbff8beb131d.html

The original post describes a normal person though, not someone with OCD, so that's not really the opposite of ADD/ADHD.
 
Really? I wasn't aware of that. I have been diagnosed with ADHD in childhood and could clearly still be diagnosed with (mixed) adult ADHD. However I remember being very compulsive throughout my entire childhood which only got better when I moved countries and took acid at 16. :D

I have also been diagnosed with bipolar disorder 1, so some would argue this explains all symptoms. However looking at what amphetamine does to me I am convinced it fixes everything that is wrong about my cognitive functions in respect to the inattentive ADHD symptoms. Unfortunately it also makes me very obsessed, act very compulsively and brings out my hypomania (or worse). Hypomania always comes with massive compulsive behaviour and god knows what obsessions.

I really don't know shit about psychological interpretations of these disorders, but I can really find myself in both diagnoses. They're just never really present at the same time. My psychiatrists blame it all on bipolar (obviously) and while that can be done, the cognitive impairments of depression and the obsessive-compulsive aspects of my (hypo)mania are both so pronounced, that I feel the other two disorders describe much better what symptoms I express. The fact that I've been abusing drugs for almost two decades doesn't really make diagnosis easier, especially the differential between drug induced psychosis and mania, but doctors make it out to be quite easy so far. I'm not saying I disagree, I just find it remarkable how close so many pathological cognitive, affective and behavioural patterns are to each other despite being spread out over multiple diagnostic options. Finding out which meds don't work so well still allows for an adjustment of the diagnosis if worse comes to worst. That's probably the main reason why an ADHD diagnosis just wouldn't be made in a scenario like mine. The lines are so blurry though.
 
Last edited:
endotropic said:
OCD and ADHD are considered opposite ends of the attentive spectrum from a psychological perspective. I'm not sure how well that dichotomy holds up from a neurological viewpoint though, although ADD meds are usually not prescribed to OCD folks since they make the OCD worse:

http://www.currentpsychiatry.com/ho...gh-adhd/3f3ebacb62ebb5ed6528fbff8beb131d.html

I was under the impression current DSM holds incredibly high comorbidity.

Many symptoms overlap. OCD or bipolar hypomania are often misdiagnosed as ADHD.

And aren't both sources of origin the caudate nucleus??
Click to expand...
 
ParappaTheRapper said:
I was under the impression current DSM holds incredibly high comorbidity.

Many symptoms overlap. OCD or bipolar hypomania are often misdiagnosed as ADHD.
Click to expand...
You are right about these statements (although I'd be more careful about the pathophysiology). It's just that these diagnoses are very elusive and much less clearly defined as DSM makes them out to be. The constant changes in DSM should also reflect this. The discrimination is largely based not on the difference in the clinical presentation of these illnesses, but on which med works.

When a depressive patient who has never been hypomanic goes batshit on SSRI's, a diagnosis of bipolar disorder is made. It doesn't matter whether the person has never went through non drug induced (hypo)mania. It's similar with ADHD and bipolar disorder, when amphetamine does not act as expected, the ADHD diagnosis is highly unlikely to remain in place. When OCD is seen to develope under amphetamine, doctors are also likely to make that diagnosis.

There's a reason why all of these illnesses are called 'disorders', they're much less clearly defined and explained as DSM makes them out to be. There are more or less fluent transitions. Some people don't even believe schizophrenia and bipolar disorder are distinct entities, but an expression of the same underlying problems. Crazy, isn't it? :D

In cases like mine, where all OCD and ADHD symptoms can be explained with something major like bipolar disorder, the former two diagnoses CAN be dropped. Not all psychiatrists do this and I'm unsure whether bipolar disorder is still an exclusive criterium for a diagnosis of ADHD in ICD or DSM, but it used to be. In part this is due to them losing almost all their relevance in psychiatry when you cannot treat them with the respective medication. Most importantly though, bipolar disorder usually explains all symptoms of the other disorders.
 
Last edited:
endotropic said:
OCD and ADHD are considered opposite ends of the attentive spectrum from a psychological perspective. I'm not sure how well that dichotomy holds up from a neurological viewpoint though, although ADD meds are usually not prescribed to OCD folks since they make the OCD worse:

http://www.currentpsychiatry.com/ho...gh-adhd/3f3ebacb62ebb5ed6528fbff8beb131d.html

The original post describes a normal person though, not someone with OCD, so that's not really the opposite of ADD/ADHD.
Click to expand...


I have hardly OCD. I just mean that when I hear/read something interesting I will give full attention. I did this mostly in school/college (especially if it was an at least sorta interesting topic).. But its not OCD by any means, OCD people have weird rituals and shit and has nothing to do with the opposite of ADD... I would agree more with just labeling the person a "Scholar" or even "Knowledgeable" person... I just always feel like sometimes I have the opposite of ADD/ADHD... I can sit perfectly find through a 3.5 hr movie and watch whole thing with all my intention (unless its just ridiculously horrible movie).. anyways I just never really hear about us people that actually can sit perfectly still during times of reading/listening/learning/movie/etc.... but then like over analyze movies/shows and what not... I dunno... im guessing a lot of you guys are like that too.. like when ive taken adderall it just makes me loose track of what I took it for and I end up playing video games or some other thing besides the reason I took it usually...
 
I know people say stimulants are over-prescribed and add is bs, but isnt there a way to test dopamine functioning formally instead of just symptom-improvement and trial and error with diagnosis?
 
ParappaTheRapper said:
Most adhd subjects show hyperfocus. One symptom doesnt imply disinterest in a certain subject.
Click to expand...
Yeah I was diagnosed add as a kid and I would be hyper and unable to pay attention in class UNLESS the subject actually really interested me, in which case I would have no problem paying attention and absorbing info.
 
Last edited:
Might be worth pointing out that the type of drug opposite to those used as a primary treatment for ADHD is an antipsychotic; DAergic antipsychotics also effectively resolve the symptoms of ADHD-stimulant induced psychoses.
 
gh0stmAn said:
I wonder what you would call someone, that instead of someone with ADD who can't sit still and listen, the person welcomes others knowledge and listens with all his attention and then even after the lecture/book/article/whatever goes and looks into the subject even deeper to gain even more knowledge and wisdom? What would someone of this nature be called?
Click to expand...

I don't really approve this. Having ADD doesn't mean you don't appreciate to learn new things and get deeper in the subjects. I have ADD and I droppped out school because its not adapt to how I learn things. I'm an autodidact and I love learning new things, especially about science, nature and biochemistry/pharmacology.

Since I can only focus on things I want to learn at a moment, I cannot focus at school if the subject doesn't interest me at the time it is teach but when I do want to know more about something, Google is there to find me the answers. Internet is a vast source of knowledge.

I have ADD and I have significant knowledge about things that you would learn at the university. I learn all by my self by reading hundreds of thousands of articles.

The opposite of ADD would simply be someone who focus easily on tasks.
 
^I agree. If anything gh0stmAn's description sounds just like ADHD hyperfocus. ADHD, or the inattentive type at least, is more a problem of allocating attention rather than a lack of it. If you hyperfocus on something you learn in class then you can easily sit still and take in every word and go home and read more about it. However if you hyperfocus on anything else then the class work gets low priority for attention and hence it becomes hard to focus on the topic and hence you get bored and start doing other stuff.

So the two are not necessarily the opposite. In my experience a lot of good scientists exhibit ADHD symptoms. Its just that they hyperfocus on what they research which works as a positive rather than a negative.
 
me without hyperactivity drugs as long as I have someone who can keep up with my fast pace, spur of the moment decisions and the brutal truth. I am too hyper though, I am not ADHD per say... I am hyper and impulsive so I get that label.
 
spemat said:
me without hyperactivity drugs as long as I have someone who can keep up with my fast pace, spur of the moment decisions and the brutal truth. I am too hyper though, I am not ADHD per say... I am hyper and impulsive so I get that label.
Click to expand...
Are you always 'hyper'?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top