If I sawed off your arm, you wouldn't say "Oh well it's possible that the benefits of sawing your arm off didn't disappear with treatments." There are no benefits. I'd rather have my freaking arm, just like I'd rather not be ADHD.
Trust me, there are _no_ benefits to consistently requiring powerful stimulant drugs to even begin to resemble someone who can keep a simple schedule. This disease destroys peoples' lives. You have been sold a false good by the media, hollywood, and people who write trash articles that describe the "benefits" of things such as ADHD, Aspergers, and Dyslexia.
I am certainly aware that the media like to tell feel-good stories, and that this is part of the reason for the positive coverage of dyslexia, ADHD, and other conditions.
This CEO attributed some of his leadership strengths to his dyslexia (aversion to email, method of running board and other meetings). If there were a treatment that allowed him to read better, what would happen to these benefits? And perhaps the question isn't so much what would happen to this CEO, who is all grown up and has developed his management style, but rather what would happen to kids with dyslexia who could be treated at a younger age. Would they miss out on benefits that he has developed?
If a parent had to choose between enabling their child to read better (which helps with schooling and many jobs) or having the opportunity to develop skills that could help with leadership, how would they choose? There seems to be a cognitive dissonance in the dyslexia community — where parents fiercely advocate for every treatment for their child, and simultaneously also tout the benefits of having dyslexia. If the latter is true, is the former necessary or even desirable?