Is ADD a "disorder"

[harryG]

It's a real disorder. You would know if you really have it... People who don't have it tend to get pissed that we get "special treatment" in school and are just lazy. But you guys never will be able to understand what it's like and how frustrating it is.

No wonder people with ADHD have a huge risk for developing depression and/or anxiety.

 

[grillparzerkarma]

Note:

Although brain imaging and diagnostic tests aren't required for doctors, etc., to write scrips for patients, they are available for those who want diagnosis clarification. Brain imaging is expensive as is intelligence testing, but they are there. When docs get into trouble is when they're just regular pediatricians or something who prescribe adderall.

Then again perhaps if my mother hadn't been "in the field," I never would've been diagnosed. Perhaps intelligence testing just makes me more anxious about the fact that I have a "problem." Anxiety/depression --> ADD? Placebo-ADD ? Boredom? Tangents? Once it gets so intense you just can't function, then you have a disorder; it doesn't matter whether it's formal at that point.

Look at my sentence structure in the last paragraphs I wrote. They're horrendous and wordy. I get distsracted by my own thoughts and switch from one topic to another. Does that mean I have ADD?....

 

[BilZ0r]

What I think is quite interesting, if you look at the prescription rates for methyphenidate as well as antidepressants throughout the world.. the US doesn't prescribe much more than the rest of the world when it comes to antidepressants1, but when it comes to methylphenidate and other stimulants, the US and Canada go fucking nuts, generally speaking 2.

 

[NeuroResearch2006]

I like to add this. REWARD DEFICIENCY SYNDROME AND Refractory Depression can mimmic ADD. Nobody can say no or yes ADD exists. Its opinion. Id rather say, In my case < I believe 100 PERCENT i have a reward deficiency in the Striatuim moresoe the VTA _ Nucleus Accumbens. As ost may know, Its not really the Buid up or how much Dopaminergic Neuronal Activity in the N A shell but releasing of such and receptor densitiy, of D1 or D2 receptor This is why Dexedrine, Adderall have profound effects on such reward pleasure. Added to such , opioids and you have a double wammy.

 

[Psychedelics_r_best]

I acknowledge some people have different chemical make ups in their brain, you can call them whatever you like. They are differences, just like we have different colored skin, different heights, different bodies. I don't believe anything should or needs to be homogenized or controlled by any means.

 

[Fried Man]

For everyone who "thinks" ADD and ADHD are bullshit disorders, please please PLEASE give your reasons on why and how you came to believe this. Even though this topic has been beaten to death on bluelight, it offends and upsets me when people make ignorant claims like these. I myself have, suffer, and struggle with ADHD. Maybe I should'nt care anymore when people think it's a bullshit disorder because so many people are skeptical and I should be used to it by now. It shouldn't matter what other people think because I myself know that it's a real disorder, and that I really suffer from it.

I think people who make these claims are just ignorant and uninformed about the disorder. I think many people are overdiagnosed. Some kids are basically diagnosed by their teachers and their school. They are deemed as unruly and hyperactive in class. The kids are quickly diagnosed by answering a few questions, and are immediately prescribed amphetamines. After diagnosis, some shools will not allow these kids to attend school unless they are medicated. It's ignorance and attitudes like these that lead to over diagnosing and over prescribing amphetamines. Many of the kids are most likely undisiplined and have other problems. There is much more to ADD and ADHD than just inability to pay attention and hyperactivity. ADD and ADHD are complex disorders that overlap with other disorders alot. The whole diagnosing process is long and tedious, and requires professional doctors.

For people who think its all bullshit, how much do you actually know of the disorder? Have you actually studied or at least observed kids with ADD and ADHD medicated and unmedicated? Did you even know recent studies are finding that ADD is very different from ADHD and may be two completely different learning disorders? Just please back up your claims, give some reasons behind what you think.....Or I will assume you are some just stupid fuck..........whatever, i'm done.........

 

[jasoncrest]

I think ADD/ADHD is a real disorder, but it is funny to see how in France, for example, ADD/ADHD doesn't exist.
There are no amphetamines in the french pharmacopea, we only have Ritaline, which is prescribed for severe narcolepsy!!!!

 

[Psychedelics_r_best]

Maybe the chemical variance in the brain exists, but I really dont find any "disorder" in it. Its a damn brain. Each one is different. Do you expect them to form perfect ranks and march which way we want them to?

 

[bingey]

^
good reply

However add / adhd cases are rising every year , i think with television and video games and all that crap getting only more advanced and kids being exposed to it a lot more , in a century we will maybe all have add adhd , don't you agree ? In the civilized world all the youth seems to need more and more kicks or stimulation to get off , rougher sex more sex , rougher violence more violence , the snooty uncaring attitude of people , people getting more and more egocentric.

 

[die-late]

a few thoughts...

To those that think ADD/ADHD is a complete farse, I assume you have never met anyone who suffers from the disorder, nor do you care to. Dismissing this condition completely is ignorant to say the least and disrespects those who deal with it everyday. It would be like saying that since you have never suffered from Diabetes, the people that actually do can't really ever die from it, are faking their symptoms, and the medication they rely on daily to survive is arbitrary and uneffective. It's just absurd.

However add / adhd cases are rising every year , i think with television and video games and all that crap getting only more advanced and kids being exposed to it a lot more , in a century we will maybe all have add adhd , don't you agree ? In the civilized world all the youth seems to need more and more kicks or stimulation to get off , rougher sex more sex , rougher violence more violence , the snooty uncaring attitude of people , people getting more and more egocentric.

This is the point more people need to understand.

In my opinion, ADD/ADHD is a social disorder that may or may not have existed 50 years ago (I doubt it did). I remain that the accelerating state of our society in the last half of the 20th century has a huge hand in the root cause of ADD simply because of the abnormal demand that present life has on the human body. Children are a great indicator of ADD being a more recent social bi-product mainly because although adults can have AD(H)D, it is much more apparent within kids. The reason for this may be because during their early human developmental stages, they were exposed to possible AD(H)D causing elements such as television, rapid transportation, (tele) communication, and an evolved human routine resulting in many new inputs and variables that humans are simply not used to.

For example, the ability to get on an airplane to fly across the world on a regular basis is something that may be considered unhealthy for the human body to undergo on a regular basis. It is possible that in another 50 or 100 years, humans will be dealing with a number of emerging "disorders" that are a direct result of prior social conditioning that was thought to be completely harmless, but has since proven otherwise. Another similar example would be the abundance of microwaves present all around us right now. There is still speculation regarding damage it might cause to all things alive, yet people are increasing their reliance on these microwaves every day.

Finally my point. ADD/ADHD is a REAL human characteristic that needs to be acknowledged at the very least. I feel that more research and clinical study is needed to discover possible causes before we can effectively treat ADD within society. Obviously medication has failed to provide a "cure" for ADD, however it shouldn't be disregarded for the future, despite it's misrepresentation in the past. Mostly, people need to accept that this IS a real issue and people do behave differently because of it. But that's no reason to treat them differently.

 

[BilZ0r]

Most of these areguments are completely fallacious. Just because "people with ADHD" seem really bad in comparison to "normal people" isn't an arguement that it is a disease, or anything other that one end of a spectrum of human behaviour. If you get a group of the tallest people on earth in a room, and compare them to the norm, they will look very different, but 99% of them wont have a "disease" (unlike if you get the shortest people on earth, who will).

But then of course, that begs the question, what is a disorder; a question I hoped someone else would have to bring up.

 

[die-late]

eh.....

But then of course, that begs the question, what is a disorder; a question I hoped someone else would have to bring up.

DIS-OR-DER: An ailment that affects the function of mind or body

I don't really see your point at all. I never said that AD(H)D necessarily makes people act differently or that it entitles them to any special treatment. I was just defending the idea that ADD is a real condition in life and is not just some hypothetical theory that lacks factual origin.

Also, I feel that disorders cannot be grouped and sequenced like height or hair color such as in your example. The reason for this is that every disorder can immensely vary from person to person. There are eating disorders, nervous disorders, mental disorders (etc.) and each seperate disorder can be severely different depending on the person it affects. So should people with eating disorders be expected to behave identically to those with a nervous disorder simply because both suffer from types of disorders? Or should we treat an intestinal disorder by the same method we treat learning disorders? I would say no.

However, you were partially correct in mentioning how a disorder may contribute to defining our individual mark on the human spectrum. I feel that is how we are supposed to be viewed in comparison to one another. We are all unique and our disorders and imperfections are included in our overall data making up that which seperates us from the next person and also places us on our own spot within the spectrum.

What we don't know is if 50+ years ago (or even 5,000 years ago) we would still find our same "mark" on the spectrum at the exact place it is right now. If ADD has existed as long as we have, then it should not be viewed as a "disorder" but rather a common idiosyncracy among the human race and those that possess it can stop viewing it as an illness and leave any feelings of disability behind. However, if ADD can be proven to be a completely new condition in society only affecting the most recent generations specifically, then it SHOULD be considered a legitimate "disorder" and a new goal of understaning should take the place of scepticism, in hopes of preventing future conditions.

I hope that helps clear up my standpoint.

 

[BilZ0r]

What we don't know is if 50+ years ago (or even 5,000 years ago) we would still find our same "mark" on the spectrum at the exact place it is right now. If ADD has existed as long as we have, then it should not be viewed as a "disorder" but rather a common idiosyncracy among the human race and those that possess it can stop viewing it as an illness and leave any feelings of disability behind. However, if ADD can be proven to be a completely new condition in society only affecting the most recent generations specifically, then it SHOULD be considered a legitimate "disorder" and a new goal of understaning should take the place of scepticism, in hopes of preventing future conditions.

How does how long a condition has existed for have any bearing of whether it is a disorder or not? Influenza has exists for a lot longer than humans have, and if you have it, you have a disorder under your definition, likewise, AIDS in humans has only been around for 30ish years, and it's a disorder too.

My point is that arbitrarily drawing a line in a dimension of the human continuum is stupid, and doesn't make a disorder. How hyperactive do you have to have, before you ADHD? I mean, DSM IV is a fucking joke, it is absolutely drawing a line in the sand. Someone has influenza when they have active influenza virii floating around in them, someone as athersclerosis when they have athersclerotic plaques that are causing a physical disfunction.

However most psychiatric disorders can't be pinned down in such a useful fashion. Though the difference is, there aren't doctors who say things like "yeah, but schizophrenia is just the far end of a biological continuum", as they do about ADHD as outlined in articles like this. I'm not saying ADD isn't a real disorder, I'm certain that kids with DAT mutations or prenatal lead/PCB poisoning are fucked, but most kids with ADHD don't have a physically identifiable problem, and this kind of doubt it going to surround behavioural disorders of most kinds.

 

[yaesutom]

Lots of good points being made here.

I agree the whole DSM psychiatric shit is, well, bullshit. Any mental "disorder" like ADHD, well, all these disorders are just lines being drawn - they have what, like 6 subtypes of ADHD now?

I take dexamphetamine, I do need it to focus,

What it really comes down to is, every single person has their own personal "disorder" - as science and evolution accelerate faster and faster, at an accelerating rate, well the number of "disorders" in the DSM will skyrocket up and eventually just reach the number of people on earth. Whatever drugs or therapy *YOU* personally need, well thats all that matters, whats the use of a label? Thats all it is, a LABEL.

Whats schizophrenia? My friend who went paranoid schizo over a year ago and smoked some of my DMT doesn't seem to have "schizophrenia" anymore after one DMT toke. All that matters is, what does he need or what can help (be it drugs or whatever) him in life, labeling people "schizophrenic" or "ADHD" just causes arguments and threads like this one, and also causes people to think of themselves differently (generally) if they are labeled with some "disorder".

Does amphetamine help you? Are the side effects worth it, for *you*? I do think the huge pressure on people today in society to do things faster and faster is a huge cause of the huge surge in more stupid labeling and "disorders".

If a brain imaging scan shows lack of dopamine here or there, well everyone is just a combination of their DNA + personal history - we're definitely growing up in a much different world than 50+ years ago.

I really shouldn't answer whether or not I think "ADHD" exists or not.. well, it does and it doesn't - both! It exists simply because people think it does, and also doesn't exist because of the people that don't think it exists. Its just wherever people like to draw lines and decide where the "lines" should be for when someone has some disorder or not, a bunch of stupid labels.

 

[BilZ0r]

^ Well there are lines and there are lines... It's interesting, look at two aspects of human physiology, which are patently continuums: Hight and weight. As I said, if you draw a line at the top 1% and bottom 1%, of the top 1% most wont have a disorder (just a collection of genes and environment), and will only have mildly worse health, while the bottom 1% will have a disorder (genetic mutation), and will die very much younger than everyone else.

When you look at wieght, both the top and bottom 1% will die vastly earlier than normal people. BUT the skiniest 1% will be that way for a variety of reasons, some will be eating normally, but will have that hyper-metabolic disease, some will be anorexic, some will simpley be dieing of starvation...

But to fattest 1% most will be that way simpley because they ate too much food. You can draw an arbitrary line, and you will have a relatively homogonous group (in fact, probably geographically homogonous too, hello Texas). So that's a less arbitrary line than the others.

See what I'm getting at? That if you draw a line, and you get a group of people who are suffering from the same disorder, for the same reason, and need the same treatments, then it's not really that arbitrary at all, even though you're still drawing a line.

 

[protovack]

How hyperactive do you have to have, before you ADHD? I mean, DSM IV is a fucking joke, it is absolutely drawing a line in the sand.

I don't think the DSM exists to draw lines in the sand. It's a guide for mental health workers and interested lay-people...nothing magical about it.

Someone has influenza when they have active influenza virii floating around in them, someone as athersclerosis when they have athersclerotic plaques that are causing a physical disfunction.

So we shouldn't treat something unless we discover its biochemical basis?

Yes, a straw-man, please forgive me, but why point out medical diagnoses for diseases with known mechanisms? As if there is some non-chemical basis for anything?

 

[protovack]

But the fattest 1% most will be that way simpley because they ate too much food

But..

Random mutations in inbred mice exhibited 5 mutant loci with major obesity phenotypes. Two of these are ob (obese) and db (diabetes, diabetes is very common in obese mice and humans). Coupling the circulatory system of a normal mouse to an ob/ob mouse caused both mice to be normal, suggesting that a circulating hormone was lacking in ob/ob mice. Coupling a db/db mouse to a normal or ob/ob mouse did not change the db/db mouse, suggesting that the defective molecule in db/db mice does not circulate. (In trying to compensate for their problem, db/db mice overproduce the ob hormone, thereby reducing the weight of their coupled partner.) Since the phenotypes of ob/ob and db/db were virtually identical, this suggests that the db-defective molecule could be the receptor for the ob-defective hormone.


Friedman's group at Rockefeller used genetic map-based cloning to isolate the ob-defective gene and showed that this gene did encode a protein hormone called leptin. Tartaglia's group at Millenium Pharmaceuticals isolated the gene for the ob receptor, Ob-R, and showed (along with Friedman) that a particular form of the Ob-R protein is defective, as predicted, in db/db mice. This specific form of Ob-R is primarily made in the hypothalamus in the brain, the probable site of leptin action.


Fatty tissues in the body make leptin, the more fat, the more leptin. Leptin goes to the hypothalamus and binds Ob-R (Ob-R is a cytokine-type receptor which activates a transcription factor called STAT3). It is believed that leptin binding may trigger a decrease in the amount of neuropeptide Y that is made. (At least two other previously-identified mutant genes, tubby and fat, may be involved in the synthesis of neuropeptide Y in the hypothalamus.) Neuropeptide Y is believed to migrate to another region of the hypothalamus. Among the effects of neuropeptide Y is an increase in feeding.

 

[BilZ0r]

When they first found leptin, they were like "AHA! This is why fat people are fat, we will have obesity cured within a week". And then they found "woops, turns out fat people have relatively normal leptin synthesis and action".

I don't think the DSM exists to draw lines in the sand. It's a guide for mental health workers and interested lay-people...nothing magical about it.

Yeah it seriously draws lines in the sand. I mean it has to, but it still does. When it starts pulling out "if you've got 4 of the following 7 symptomes you've got disease X" thats serious line drawing.

So we shouldn't treat something unless we discover its biochemical basis?

no, of course not. What I'm saying, is that unless you find a biochemical and/or non arbitrary basis for diagnosis, then you can be more certain of whether or not it is a disorder. Or more, not several disorders clumped together.

 

[Ech0]

I think this is a slightly (actually majorly) retarded thread.

ADD/ADHD is a problem with the frontal lobe of your brain - plain and simple.

Medical evidence exists.. Google is all you need

 

[human]

My point is that arbitrarily drawing a line in a dimension of the human continuum is stupid, and doesn't make a disorder. How hyperactive do you have to have, before you ADHD?

To me, the most logical answer to that question is "Hyperactive enough that it interferes with day to day life." Of course then you have to define what interference is, but that can probably be left to the patient. If someone really and truly feels that something is interfering with everyday life, I think they'll be able to define just what the interference is. Now, this could be misread as if I'm advocating self-diagnosis, which I'm not. I'm just saying that in a behavioral disorder the thoughts of the patient are just as important as the thoughts of the mental health professional.