When I realized there was a low dose medication that could basically cure me of ADHD (thus cure me of underperformance, procrastinating my ambitions, low professional self-esteem), the choice was obvious. Know what also does harm? Underperformance, procrastinating my ambitions, low professional self-esteem. Far worse than any side-effect from amphetamine. And I'd take on much worse harms if they would cure my ADHD like amphetamine does.
Edit: lol, when I started my reply to you, your comment was two sentences long. Take it easy.
Btw, I'm in my mid-30s and I've been taking amphetamine since I was 18. Perfect bill of health. Though, granted, there's plenty of life left.
I don't think most people would consider someone servicing an active physical dependency to have a "perfect bill of health", even if you are totally free from disease.
Of course, many medications that aren't psychotropic fit the bill. Corticosteroids, for a common example, lead to physical dependency too. Most medications lead to some kind of physical dependency after prolonged use, it's just sometimes of very low grade.
The second option is much better from any pathological point of view.
To note, perfect health doesn't exist. We're all broken in some way :)
You’d be right, but it does not do significant harm, especially given how therapeutic the right drug can be in the right doses.
Can it do significant harm? Sure. So can Ibuprofen.
(As an aside, the reason I've gone days without meds is because my insurance company has a harmful policy of requiring "prior authorization" from the same doctor who prescribes the pills, and more than once I've found out it needed renewed from a pharmacist who was only allowed to try filling it the day I took my last pill. I'm tired of this incredibly helpful medication, and the people who depend on it, being thought less of.)
Is taking immunosuppressants also a physical dependency or a functional addiction?
What's the alternative? CBT is not sufficient when your brain doesn't want to work. Executive function disorder is a huge part of being ADHD.
> There are serious negative long-term effects from taking amphetamines regularly
Citation needed for therapeutic dosages.
> They cause harm, even at low doses.
Citation definitely needed for therapeutic dosages.
> Ceasing regular [...] subsequent YEARS of oversleeping, lethargy, and depression
Citation really really needed here for therapeutic dosages.
Anecdotal advice like this is exceptionally harmful to those who need these meds to just reach "functional adult" levels of normal.
My comment isn't saying that you shouldn't, it's saying that there are downsides that are not apparent that must be weighed against the upsides—same as any medication. Even ibuprofen can fuck up your stomach, each remedy must be evaluated on its risks and merits.
I speak from extreme personal experience. Same team!
We're not telling folks to go on a meth binge. We're telling folks that this doctor prescribed medication actually works, and can help improve their lives.
To use your own ibuprofin example - what your parent statement is proposing equals: "Don't use ibuprofin for your chronic inflammation, even though your doctor prescribed it for you."
EDIT: If COVID has taught me anything, it's that we as human beings are poorly equipped to make appropriate cost/benefit analysis when it comes to medical advice. Especially when it comes to anecdotal experiences. And doubally especially when you're already suffering from untreated ADHD.
The goal of almost any medication is to create a stop gap to create or find non-medication solutions. Without Adderall, I can't focus on creating systems and tools to help me stay on track.
Demonizing Adderall isn't helping anyone. No one should be afraid of taking a medication that will change their life for the better. If someone goes through normal channels and gets properly prescribed it, they should be treated no different than any other ailment.
Your comment opens with:
> Get diagnosed and get a low-dose of meds.
Immediately suggesting that someone seek a somewhat dangerous medication as a solution, without qualification, is an extreme and dangerous view. "You have ADD so you should try low doses of speed!" is not wisdom. There is a reason that these are prescribed by doctors, and monitored.
Medication helps a lot. You could struggle with no medication, trying to build a system to help yourself, possibly fail and never be who you can be or you can seek out professional help (potentially with medication) and begin building support today and have a good shot.
---
Would you say the same if I encouraged a depressed person to do their best to get diagnosed and get on 'anti-depressants'? I am doubtful.
We have invented medication for a reason. People go to decades of med school for a reason. Medical professionals know what they are doing and are very upfront about it not being a panacea and needing to still work on non-medication solutions (as with any medication).
I will admit my first sentence ("Get diagnosed and get a low-dose of meds") was too strong to start with.
Don't be: many studies have shown CBT to be equally as effective for depression (for most people) as medication. If you are equally likely to cure your issues with a book on CBT versus a pill, that is something you should consider, even if you do end up deciding for the pill.
I encourage people to evaluate the costs and benefits of ALL their options before seeking any specific treatment for issues that involve neurochemistry. My entire thrust is "medication is not a panacea and you should not bias toward using it, over any other option, as a solution".
For some it may be the best choice. For many it is not. Don't bias toward it (as you advocate). Evaluate, don't just go get pills because some random person on the internet said it worked for them that one time.
If you put the wrong thing in your body, you can fuck yourself up for a very long time. I am speaking from direct personal experience.
But this is not the case for ADHD. ADHD has one of if not the strongest case where there is a direct curative effect of medication.
There is at least one non-stimulant drug that can be prescribed (atomoxetine), but it doesn't work for a lot of people (including me).
However, I want to mention modafinil (particularly as no-one else has mentioned it in this discussion). It has worked for me and there is evidence to its effectiveness as a non-stimulant medication for ADHD - https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11191692/ - although it's technically an off-label use.
There are serious negative long-term effects from taking amphetamines regularly. Such advice as above is very one-size-fits-all, and in my view is thus really bad advice.
> Ignore the people screaming about Adderall being "literal meth" and how it will certainly kill you.
You can ignore those people because they're wrong, amphetamine is not methamphetamine. But do not ignore the people who tell you that even normal amphetamines (adderall) are not harmless. They cause harm, even at low doses.
The harm they cause may be mitigated by the benefit they bring; it may also be extremely difficult to estimate their harm in advance. Ceasing regular use of amphetamines for some people can result in subsequent YEARS of oversleeping, lethargy, and depression from dopamine receptor downregulation.
> I don't feel strung out nor is it some addiction.
Amphetamines are a highly addictive substance, if you are taking them every day it is likely that your body has developed at least some physical dependence upon them. Addiction doesn't make itself known until you stop.