• Select Your Topic Then Scroll Down
    Alcohol Bupe Benzos
    Cocaine Heroin Opioids
    RCs Stimulants Misc
    Harm Reduction All Topics Gabapentinoids
    Tired of your habit? Struggling to cope?
    Want to regain control or get sober?
    Visit our Recovery Support Forums

Stimulants ADHD stimulants and heart attack risks, how risky is it?

Adderall or racemic amphetamines are not that bad for your heart.

It's not like you're using actual meth, or cocaine which are both extremely bad for your heart.

Amphetamines are one of the drugs they've studied for decades, and even Adderall in low doses is not harmful for your heart.

You're worried about an increase in heart rate but this happens when you exercise, and it also happens when you smoke herb, or drink caffeine. If you have major heart problems you would never have been prescribed Adderall or Dexedrine at all, and would have been told to avoid all caffeine, exercise, etc.

Heh, yeah they may not directly damage the heart but your heart beating at a 50% higher rate is dangerous. Yeah exercise raises your heart rate, but it doesn't keep it raised for hours on end afterwards. That is what regular adderall did for me, I'd have a 150+bpm for 1-2 hours after some exercise. It doesn't stay that bad for that long on dextroamphetamine alone. Most people don't have as high of a resting bpm as I do, nor do they have a hypersensitive CNS. So for those people, yes adderall generally isn't too dangerous to their heart. However, adderall is still much worse on your heart than just dex. So for someone who it is a problem, like me (and many others), it is better to be on dextroamphetamine than a d-amp and l-amp mixture.

""A number of studies have shown that, even within the normal range, a high resting heart rate is associated with an increased risk for ischemic heart disease, stroke, and sudden cardiac death," Tomaselli says.
Norwegian researchers recently reported that for every 10-beat rise in resting heart rate, the risk of dying from a heart attack rose by 18% in women and by 10% in men. And a recent Japanese study showed that a resting heart rate higher than 80 beats per minute was associated with a greater risk of becoming obese or developing heart disease decades later."

So yeah, adderall gives me another 10-30% higher risk of heart attack than dextroamphetamine does alone. So it is more dangerous.

Edit: On top of the lower bpm during the day with d-amp, on adderall I would fall asleep and wake up around 120-130bpm, with dextroamphetamine my heart actually gets a break when I sleep. l-amp has a longer elimination half-life than d-amp does, and I could never process the l-amp fast enough.

Yeah of course, Dexedrine provides euphoria, but not for long. Even when you stop taking it often, it stops providing euphoria more than 30 minutes and then it's comedown town.

The euphoria from dextroamphetamine drops off at about the same rate that it does for adderall, so I don't see your point? Both lose euphoria very quickly, and I think he was asking if dex doesn't have euphoria when compared to adderall.
 
Last edited:
Wow, that is some scary stuff. I assumed that having a high resting pulse is more unhealthy than having a low resting pulse but I wasn't aware that
this is so dramatic. My pdoc even criticized me for getting off anafranil cause I had a pulse of 90. He said 90 is still normal. But not for me. Usually I have 60
and I don't want to feel like I'm running all the time.
 
I believe how much your heart rate increases is the biggest factor in ADHD stimulants being a heart risk. IIRC it is somewhere around 10% increased risk for every 10bpm over 60. My heart rate is generally around 80-90 without stimulants, and on stimulants it is 120-130. So stimulants increase my risk of a heart attack by 40-50%. It is worth it. Why live with 40-50% less risk, when it means a shitter life without the ability to think properly?

If you run on a treadmill your heart rate easily can go up to 140-190. This is why the mass hysteria around stimulants is ridiculous. Heart attacks also don't exist like people think they do. Your heart doesn't just beat faster and faster and then stop, what happens is you breathe in air which causes the heart to pump blood, if the heart beats faster than the lungs can take in air you won't be moving at all, to experiment, go running for a few minutes and see how you get what they call "winded".

That is my first proof to show you all you are having panic attacks, not heart attacks. If you have a heart attack, you won't be able to talk, let alone move around or think clearly. So the heart rate cannot exceed past the capacity of your lungs because it is like a computer operating faster than its electricity allows it to. How do stimulants raise heart rate then? They make your lungs work more efficiently. By stimulating the central nervous system, ALL biological functions speed up as a result. You breathe faster (hence the increased heart rate), you sweat more (hence meth "acne"), you feel more (hence the greater sexual pleasure from orgasm), and your brain works much more efficiently (if you have ADHD/ADD that is, it is like defragging your brain).

Now what is a heart attack, then? Again, there is no "heart attack". The first way your heart will stop beating is if you cannot breathe. This is how people who use too much CNS depressants or downers die, as these do the opposite of stimulants to the central nervous system, in that they slow everything down instead of speed it up. You breathe slower, you sweat less, your brain works slower (which is why you don't get anxiety on them and don't think as much), and such. Now if you take too much downers your breathing keep slowing down until your heart cannot beat fast enough to send blood to the brain and hence you die (brain death is the only true death).

However, we have a built-in safeguard from this happening. It is called sleeping. If your breathing slows down enough you fall asleep, and wake up when your breathing speed increases. This is why people who overdose on heroin for example, usually inject it, because they put too much dope in the needle and the safeguard is overruled, because their brains cannot counteract the effects fast enough. A simple safeguard against this is to start small with downers and gradually increase the amount with time intervals between. This means if you take what would be a lethal dose in one shot, spread out with 15 minutes in between, you would fall asleep before you would die. What happens is that people try to impress their friends (same with alcohol intoxication) or get a really strong effect, so they take more than they can handle. This can be prevented with this method.

The other way you die from not being able to breathe is if you choke, which is how people in my opinion actually die from opiate overdoses. What happens is you are sleeping and cannot wake up because you are breathing too slowly, but your body rejects something, usually when people combine alcohol with it, as your liver cannot process alcohol if there's no blood to do that task, so you throw up, and normally you'd wake up when this happens, but you cannot wake up, so it blocks the airways.

So that's the first and main concern about "heart attacks". The other is clogged arteries, the heart works fine but the arteries cannot send blood as efficiently, but you don't have to worry about this, because there are symptoms before this kills you, you will feel weak and tired all the time, and get actual pain in your body because there's not enough blood to perform tasks, and not in one area like pins in needles, but all the body. This can be resolved by simply exercising more and reducing low density level carbohydrates, or getting surgery to clear blocked arteries.

Next you have heart disease, which is when your heart itself gets basically infected with a virus or bacteria, this is what you all might think of as a heart attack. This can be resolved with antibiotics or surgery in most cases.

Heart failure is just when the heart works less good than it used to, but it can be reversed with simple lifestyle changes.

So to put it simply; people don't just drop dead from stimulants, there are signs first.




As for having a higher or lower heart rate, it all depends on anxiety and exercise. If you are sitting around at peace, lower heart rate, sitting around anxious, faster, exercising not anxious faster, exercising anxious faster, etc.

Blood pressure is the thing to get checked, not heart rate. But this too changes, and you decrease this by exercising and eating better.


Stop freaking out people... in summation...

Stimulants: They don't make you drop dead unless you were going to drop dead anyway. Still, start small and slowly increase doses to get where you want to be.
Depressants: Same as stimulants. Again, with both drug classes, start slow, but especially be cautious when you mix drugs, as they don't just add to each other, they multiply each other.
Hallucinogens/Dissociatives/Etc: Even less risk with these. Again, dose small, get your health checked first. These are actually the safest class of drugs, but when on them they can make your panic attack much worse and make you think whatever you believe is happening, which is why you have a good trip by staying positive, a bad trip by staying negative.
 
Meth is highly neurotoxic, while Addreall/Dexedrine are not.

Very few people prescribed adderall or dexedrine take it 7 days a week/365 days a year. A lot take weekends off and a full week every month, or go for months not taking it while on vacation, thus stopping tolerance. Each comedown is your brain rebuilding itself.

Also, the tweakers I know who are/were into meth many of them did get dementia early in life, and they didn't even use meth daily and just used it on weekends but they have permanent damage to their brain from their use/abuse of crystal meth. But people who used Adderall or Dexedrine even the people who got addicted to one or both do not.

Ah-huh. Bullshit. Cocaine is inherently cardiotoxic, not even meth. Go to addforums and see what the people on Desoxyn have to say about it....I say that because meth here comes in pills, and oral (yes, a lot of people do crush them to snort them, but its an inferior method to me, sure kicks in faster, effects gone 45 minutes later, especially since people tend to snort 1/4 fo pills) meth when taken in small doses is the best thing and the comedown isn't even as bad. Those pills can't even be smoked though, it's powder meth that's pressed into pills. There's a thread in Drugs in the Media about a pill pressing machine was seized when a meth weed and cocaine distribution gang was caught here in Quebec. It would make about 100 000 methbombs a day. I liked to take a half of a pill and then another half later at 3-4am when everyone I was partying with (the more girls, the better) starts jonesing for a bit more, thats why I would always get 15 pills at once. Oh those old good days....goddamn. We also had E a lot easier then too, but here there's a street code that never fails, white pills = meth, colourful pills = mdxx or mdxx + some meth.

Cardiotoxic and neurotoxic are both words that mean nothing, that seem intelligent.

Neurotoxic theory is that these chemicals work the opposite they are supposed to long term. So if a drug gives you pleasure, it will reduce your ability to feel plessure with out it, hence neurotoxic. The actual truth is drugs allow you to feel pleasure that is greater than you can ever feel without them, hence why it is so hard to quit them. People aren't living happy lives and use drugs and their life goes to hell, people are living mediocore lives and they get a taste of bliss, some would then go from mediocore to poverty because they'd rather be homeless and high than with a home and unhappy. Now the rich ones who use drugs and are successful keep using them, when they stop using, you get what happened to Robin Williams, hence why rehab doesn't work ever.

As for cardiotoxic, a drug cannot damage your heart directly, unless some shoots it out of a gun at your heart. Does making your heart beat faster damage the heart? Nobody knows. Some would say never move quickly just walk and sit and live long, othres would say exercise rigurously to get the heart rate up... actually I do know, your heart will go when it is meant to, which is determined at birth by your genetics, unless of course you get shot or some virus.

Now obviously there are drugs which can kill you out right like cyanide, or too much of any drug will also, but no drug is going to kill you in reasonable amounts if you aren't going to die anyway.

Hence why marathon runners drop dead at 40, and some hardcore drug addicts live to be 90.
 
If you run on a treadmill your heart rate easily can go up to 140-190. This is why the mass hysteria around stimulants is ridiculous. Heart attacks also don't exist like people think they do. Your heart doesn't just beat faster and faster and then stop, what happens is you breathe in air which causes the heart to pump blood, if the heart beats faster than the lungs can take in air you won't be moving at all, to experiment, go running for a few minutes and see how you get what they call "winded".

This post is so fucking ignorant, I don't even know where to start. When I get off of the treadmill, my heart rate comes back down to resting within 30 minutes or so. On amphetamines, they don't! So how the hell do you think they are comparable? Your heart rate stays increased the entire time you are on stimulants, not for 1 hour out of the day. Also, I never said I had a heart attack, I said I was at an increased risk for one. According to real scientists, and not your ignorant bullshit, I have around a 50% higher chance of a heart attack just by being on amphetamines. Stop trying to be an armchair scientist by reading Dr. Seuss and maybe you'll get somewhere.

"Living near major highways - heart attack survivors who live near major highways have a 27% higher risk of another heart attack within a decade compared to survivors who live further away, researchers from the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center reported in the journal Circulation (May 2012 issue).
The researchers compared heart attack survivors who lived within 328 feet (100 meters) or less from a major highway to their counterparts who lived at least 3,280 feet (1,000 meters) away."

No one knows exactly what makes you more at risk for heart attacks. So don't pretend like you do. I am going to listen to the medical journals I read over some ignorant opinion.

Cardiotoxic and neurotoxic are both words that mean nothing, that seem intelligent.

Hence why marathon runners drop dead at 40, and some hardcore drug addicts live to be 90.

Dude your posts are so damn ignorant. Your posts are what mean nothing and try to seem intelligent, not the word "neurotoxic". A neurotoxin is something that damages nervous tissue. What the fuck is meaningless about that? You have no fucking idea of what you are talking about and just spouting out bullshit. That is not why some drug addicts live to be 90; there are so many factors to health and longevity, and I doubt you have any better of an idea of what causes it over the world's leading scientists, let alone even me.
 
stonedboss said:
So yeah, adderall gives me another 10-30% higher risk of heart attack than dextroamphetamine does alone. So it is more dangerous.

If that's actually the case why are you even taking stimulants? Keep in mind 99% of people do not have a very fast resting heart rate and react fine to low doses of amphetamine. Did you talk to your doctor about all of this? What did he or she say?
 
If that's actually the case why are you even taking stimulants? Keep in mind 99% of people do not have a very fast resting heart rate and react fine to low doses of amphetamine. Did you talk to your doctor about all of this? What did he or she say?

As I stated above, it is worth it to me. No one really knows your exact risk, but using some bullshit risk calculator, it says I have a 7% chance of cardiovascular disease/problems in the next 30 years. 30% higher chance puts me at 9.1%. So I can live the next 30 years with a 7% chance, but a shitty life with deficient cognitive functions. Or I can be happy and have my cognitive functions with a slightly higher risk. I'd rather die than not be able to work on my philosophical theories, so it isn't even a choice for me. Without stimulants I will often forget what I am saying mid-sentence, let alone hold an abstract theory in my mind long enough to make any progress on it.

Yes I have talked to my doctor. That is why I switched to dextroamphetamine. 120 bmp isn't deathly dangerous, I just have a higher risk now. Like I said, it is not damaging but simply more dangerous, and dextroamphetamine is less dangerous. I never said someone shouldn't take adderall, but that dex is less dangerous for your heart. So for someone with heart risks already it is best to stick with dex. I should worded post #34 as it is worse for* your heart not worse "on" your heart.

Just because something is worse doesn't mean it is necessarily bad/harmful, because as others have pointed out not everyone has heart problems or high resting bpm. This thread is specifically about heart risks though related to amphetamine use, and what are some relevant factors (such as bpm).

PS- MD's generally are not that intelligent and are just highly trained. I will put more weight on my own personal research over anything a MD tells me any day. On top of that, most are too ignorant to become more informed than what the pharmeceutical rep tells them.
 
Of course foolish tweakers are going to claim that meth is fine, that it's not neurotoxic, bad for your body, or cardiotoxic, and yet low doses of amphetamines like the brands dexedrine or adderall are horrible for your body, heart, mind, etc.; but that's tweaker logic for you. ;)

Hey, I wasn't claiming such, I'm saying all stims suck long term, in various ways. I ain't no damn tweaker, I'll admit to my junkieity as for being on bupe since 18 months though. That made me laugh though.
 
I see a lot of ignorance here from both stonedboss and Psychedelic Wizard.

For the record, comparisons of cardiovascular risk to resting heart rate are associative, rather than causal. This means that, looking at broad swaths of the population, or at a sample with similar distribution characteristics as broad swaths of the population, a trend in risk is identified with a trend in bpm. This does not mean that higher bpm causes higher risk. Rather, higher bpm is probably caused by other factors, such as genetics, less frequent exercise, etc which also contribute to cardiovascular risk. A group of people who have an increased heart rate due to stimulant use is not representative of the total population of people with increased heart rates, and therefore no association can be drawn.

Also note that the main reason that heart rate increases is to compensate for decreased blood flow--which is often because of vasoconstriction caused by stimulants.

Furhermore, methamphetamine has been shown to be neurotoxic (ie. causing damage to neurons) even at low doses. On the other hand, amphetamine has been shown to be neurotoxic at high doses, but not neurotoxic below a certain threshold. And none of this has anything to do with cardiotoxicity.

So, are stimulants cardiotoxic? Well, we don't really know. My guess is yes, though mildly. Higher heart rates are actually less efficient at moving oxygen around the body. The heart's compensatory response to this is to attempt to contract with greater force. This greater force of contraction builds up the strength of the heart muscle. But a stronger heart muscle is a bigger heart muscle, and a bigger heart muscle means less space within the heart for blood. This is called ventricular hypertrophy.

And... guess what. Anaerobic exercise causes this too. But Anaerobic exercise also kills people for this exact reason. Bodybuilding is actually rather bad for you.
 
Adderal is way safer than meth. I like the experience better than meth (but they're my GF's, dude! she got ADD) just don't take more than 60mg of adderal @ one time is my experience.
 
What about stimulants and ischemia without having clogged coronary arteries? This is also possible.
I read about a case where a young person got a heart attack from a combo or ritalin,wellbutrin and something else.
 
I see a lot of ignorance here from both stonedboss and Psychedelic Wizard.

For the record, comparisons of cardiovascular risk to resting heart rate are associative, rather than causal. This means that, looking at broad swaths of the population, or at a sample with similar distribution characteristics as broad swaths of the population, a trend in risk is identified with a trend in bpm. This does not mean that higher bpm causes higher risk. Rather, higher bpm is probably caused by other factors, such as genetics, less frequent exercise, etc which also contribute to cardiovascular risk. A group of people who have an increased heart rate due to stimulant use is not representative of the total population of people with increased heart rates, and therefore no association can be drawn.

Also note that the main reason that heart rate increases is to compensate for decreased blood flow--which is often because of vasoconstriction caused by stimulants.

Furhermore, methamphetamine has been shown to be neurotoxic (ie. causing damage to neurons) even at low doses. On the other hand, amphetamine has been shown to be neurotoxic at high doses, but not neurotoxic below a certain threshold. And none of this has anything to do with cardiotoxicity.

So, are stimulants cardiotoxic? Well, we don't really know. My guess is yes, though mildly. Higher heart rates are actually less efficient at moving oxygen around the body. The heart's compensatory response to this is to attempt to contract with greater force. This greater force of contraction builds up the strength of the heart muscle. But a stronger heart muscle is a bigger heart muscle, and a bigger heart muscle means less space within the heart for blood. This is called ventricular hypertrophy.

And... guess what. Anaerobic exercise causes this too. But Anaerobic exercise also kills people for this exact reason. Bodybuilding is actually rather bad for you.

I don't give a fuck about your meta-analysis. The studies may not prove higher bpm necessarily means higher risk, but it also doesn't mean that higher bpm doesn't mean higher risk. What you are saying is speculation, so stop acting as if you know what's what. The fact is, multiple journals believe that higher bpm=higher risk. With no one knowing what exactly constitutes more risk, I am going to be cautious and treat those journals as possibly correct, over following your pessimistic meta-analysis that you think is so much better.

Besides scientific studies of cardiotoxicity, it is just a fact of physics that a pump is being stressed more when it is pumping faster to reach the same output with constricted routes. Just as you explained it compensates by growing, and therefore even less room for good blood flow.

A hinge only has so many moves before needing repair, the same for your cells. The more it moves the faster it will need repairs. Just as with your cells though, the hinge will last ~80 years, so you won't notice the tiny extra wear from a few months. I'd rather not burn through my precious dna (just as the hinge and cell, your dna only has so many rewrites before it starts falling apart too) just simply to repair my heart from its excess use. Yes, DNA does have a limited amount of times to be replicated/transferred. Each time you gain mutations and the redundancy only goes so far, hence why we usually live to 80 just fine, but possibly not until 180. Cancer would happen a lot more often if it were not for this redundancy, but the redundancy can and does break down, hence why we have cancer patients.

It may be not direct at all or even risk for heart attack (big maybe, small enough chance for me to not neglect it as a risk), but in some way or another more use(faster bpm)=less lifespan. And your other points are moot as I explained.
 
Last edited:
Stonedboss, your argumentation versus that of iFACT makes me take iFACTS side, whether or not your arguments are possibly true. Saying "I don't give a fuck about your meta-analysis" to start of your debating makes you seem not only weak in the discussion, but also immature and an asshole.
 
Stonedboss, your argumentation versus that of iFACT makes me take iFACTS side, whether or not your arguments are possibly true. Saying "I don't give a fuck about your meta-analysis" to start of your debating makes you seem not only weak in the discussion, but also immature and an asshole.

LOL. That is fine, as I take that statement as being weak and immature. An ad hominem will get you very far in life! So keep using it to decide what is true!

Also, what is wrong with the use of fuck? Are you not mature enough to handle the emotion conveyed by the use of "fuck"? I was never in a debate in the first place to think or treat this as one. You are the one that needs to grow up man. Adults can use language that they see fit, and it doesn't diminish what they are saying unless they are running for a charisma competition.

And yes, I take that much disgust to someone spewing ignorant speculation as fact. That type of practice can result in lives lost when the situation is serious enough.

Edit: PS- Speaking on maturity, not that I care about the rules myself, but both of you have broken the forum rules whilst I have not. Hmm...
 
Last edited:
You interpreted that all wrong. I don't give a fuck if you use the word fuck. It's that you are just 'ignoring' part of iFACT's reasoning because you don't care. I'm not the type of person to be easily offended by words I'm the type of person that's agitated by cockish behaviour. Also, I didn't call you an asshole, I said your choice of words made you seem like one.

Oh and where did I break any rule?
 
"You seem like an asshole" sounds a whole lot like an insult. If you didn't mean to, then you did a poor job at conveying that. Either way, doesn't bother me. If you had the intellect to notice, I said I don't give a fuck about it as an intro to my direct reply to his meta-analysis. If you could read between the lines you'd see "I dont give a fuck about it because it is moot and here's why..." followed by my explanation.
Hence why I had to presume you were bothered by the word "fuck", because otherwise I'd need to assume you got into a conversation which you lack the intellect to follow.

Maybe you should take a look in a mirror some time. I don't know your definition of "cockish behavior", but to me it is something like *steps in a thread to make a quick ad hominem and add nothing useful*.
 
Last edited:
Top