Everything you’ve said is correct, but please don’t demonize a medication that I depend on to be functional. ADHD is a disability, there’s more nuance to this than black-and-white.

I was blown off by doctors for years when I was seeking a diagnostics because I was a successful person, but make no mistake: I was suffering. I am a textbook case. The stigma around this disorder is pervasive and it’s extremely easy to reinforce that stigma.

Stimulant medication doesn’t give me superpowers, it improves symptoms. I still have all the problems that come with ADHD, just... less.

Google is failing me, but a study a few years ago indicated that stimulants do not have a meaningful impact on the output of those who do not have ADHD. People often think they do because of the euphoria effect, but the euphoria is actually a transient side effect.

Stimulants should be paired with therapy, to better understand the nature of the disorder and developer additional coping tool.

(I’ve been on stimulant medication to treat ADHD for about half a decade. I was diagnosed well into adulthood.)

My story is the same, blown off by doctors for years because, I don't know, but not being "too successful" was definitely part of it.

Lead to a burnout-like state that started developing while basically being a stay-at-home dad for a year or so. It got worse, and now there are several years of my daughter growing up that I don't remember almost anything from.

ADHD is not a disability. It's an evolutionary set of traits. It is covered under the Big Five.

I would argue that ADHD presents as a disability in a post-industrial society. ADHD Institute suggests that the diagnosis is commonly associated with substance abuse, major depression and a wide range of other conditions, in higher frequency than baseline populations[0]

[0]: https://adhd-institute.com/burden-of-adhd/comorbidities/

In Sweden at least it is classified as a disability, because whether or not it's a evolutionary adaptation, people that present typical ADHD traits are functionally disabled in modern society. Society should change to accommodate these traits, but we can't expect people with those traits to live in misery until then.

Yeah not to sound like a "deep" 15 year old but I think being able to function in our modern society is much more unnatural than the behaviors associated with ADHD. But since is the society we're in, having it really is a disability.

TL;DR: "we live in a society"

As what, lack of conscientiousness?

When you've grown up with executive dysfunction and excessive difficulty regulating emotion, the ability to choose to sit down and do a task that doesn't grab your attention sure FEELS like a superpower, but all it's doing is effectively medicating your condition.

The best parallel I can think of is that getting effective medication for ADHD is like getting glasses. Suddenly a part of your life that doesn't work (and maybe has never worked) is suddenly functional. People tend to be pretty excited about their glasses when they first get them, too.

I would definitely say that glasses are a great comparison.

I recommend discarding any anecdotes from people who recently started taking stimulants like Adderall, Vyvanse, or Ritalin. The parent comment is correct in that early stimulant usage is associated with euphoria and motivation that do not last.

If someone describes Adderall like the magic drug that Bradley Cooper takes in the movie Limitless, they probably haven't been taking it very long. Tolerance quickly builds to those effects.

People who have been taking Adderall since childhood or for a decade of adult life tend to have more mixed reviews. That's not to say it doesn't have a place in treatment of life-impacting ADHD disorders, but it should be noted that it's not a miracle drug that automatically turns you into a motivated, organized person. Even patients who take stimulants must make an effort to build good time management habits and self-discipline. Those who rely too heavily on the motivating effects of stimulant drugs can end up worse off when they inevitably build tolerance to the euphoric effects and still haven't learned how to manage their ADHD.

I've also noticed a huge uptick in ADHD misinformation in the form of overly broad diagnostic criteria. If you see infographics that describe ADHD symptoms as common behaviors like "have trouble remembering names of new people" or "I sometimes forget to do all of my tasks" then it's likely junk science. Don't confuse normal human behaviors for ADHD. ADHD is something far more debilitating.

> That's not to say it doesn't have a place in treatment of life-impacting ADHD disorders, but it should be noted that it's not a miracle drug that automatically turns you into a motivated, organized person.

For one person I know that is actually how it was. From unemployed and living at home to phd studies in mathematics and publishing in prestigious journals.

Personally same order of magnitude improvement in terms of gap from worse to best. 10 years later also agree with OP but (long lasting delayed) medications have been 70% life changing, 20% maybe could have taken a day off, 10% “I drank a coffee too I’m jittery/euphoric/etc”.

A typical characteristic of people with ADHD is that typical doses of - say Ritalin - creates no euphoric effect at all.

Every adult I met that is "on" stimulants has echoed the sentiment that they don't understand why on earth anyone would take them recreationally. Ergo, they don't feel euphoria, because then it would certainly be obvious why.

If you get euphoria from those doses, well then what you suffer from is probably not typical ADHD.

People who take stimulants as prescribed for many years don’t understand the euphoric effects because they built a tolerance long ago. Their experience cannot be compared to someone just starting the medication.

The idea that ADHD medications do not cause euphoria in ADHD patients is a myth. It’s one of the reasons some practitioners are moving to titration schedules that start with low doses and move up over time.

As an adult-diagnosed ADHD person and someone who's taken Concerta (time-released ritalin) for about 12 years, I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss a differing experience of stimulants as a myth. I had stopped taking it for about one year while I was undergoing chemotherapy, and recently started taking it again, so I have a pretty clear recollection of what it feels like to get started. No euphoria, but a feeling of mental fog clearing.

I've never experienced euphoria from stimulants, and I've always felt like I've processed caffeine differently than neurotypical individuals. I've spoken with several people with ADHD who have the same experience. Perhaps it's more accurate to say that not everyone feels euphoria from stimulants and there's some correlation between ADHD and stimulant non-euphoria.

I do agree with the titration schedule being a good idea. With any potentially mood-altering substance it seems wise to start slow. It gives time to gradually understand its effects (some good, some less so), and after some experimentation, I decided that a low dose was best for me to provide just enough of the "glasses for the brain" effect without otherwise affecting my mental state.

Anecdotal, perhaps. But enough anecdotes to point to some signal in the noise.

Spot on. People treat medication like some free lunch without understanding they come with real and significant costs.

How long does someone have to be on stimulant medication before you consider them qualified to comment on its effectiveness?

You can comment anytime, but people who have been using it less than a decade won't be able to comment on the medications post-tolerence decrease in effectiveness and side effects.

If it takes a decade to build up tolerance and a month to completely get rid of it then sustainability seems clear, no? The problem isn't physical dependence but mental dependence, ADHD forces you to become super strict with yourself to get anything done at all, medication makes you lazy since you just pop a pill and get things done, if you stop trying after getting the pills you will start having problems again just like normal people, but if you keep working as hard as before you took the pills then their effects doesn't go away.

Tolerance to the euphoric and motivating effects builds much faster than a decade. More like a few weeks.

It’s a common problem with new ADHD patients. They mistake the euphoria and motivation for the therapeutic effect, then complain that it isn’t “working” any more and ask for progressively higher doses. Some eventually start doctor shopping to find someone who will prescribe higher doses when their provider refuses.

On the decade time scale the negative effects I've heard reported are mostly clustered in the amphetamine psychosis category

Have searched Google scholar for quite a while for long term studies (I believe vyvanse was FDA approved 2009), could you help guide on this?

Warning anecdotal but a close neuro doc friend sees 70+ Year olds who took their medication as prescribed still fine when adherence was high. But much more interested in your link if at all possible, I believe there’s maybe 8 million prescriptions outstanding in the USA so any large cohort would be helpful.

Another anecdote: I was diagnosed in middle school and prescribed Vyvanse, which I took for the duration of my k-12 education. Some side effects I lived with were loss of appetite, social anxiety, difficulty sleeping, and later on a complete suppression of sex-drive. These were brought to my doctor's attention but were more or less considered costs to a greater good.

I sought behavioral therapy because the side effects became too much of a burden. I hold a job and remain productive, but I still struggle dealing with my adhd without medication. I'm not sure there's a point I'm trying to make here, just wanting to share some of my experience.

I wish you luck in finding a successful treatment plan.

This is also exactly the line of thinking that happened to keep me away from an ADHD diagnosis for such a long time. The point of the “superpower” language, when used by someone who is actually ADHD is that you feel impaired and are lead to believe by everyone and everything that this just the way you are - that you’re lazy, that you’re incompetent, dumb etc. And those successful focused people, they’re just more hard working, they put in more effort. ADHD drugs are life changing because suddenly you’re perfectly fine sitting still, being focused, not interrupting people.

Posts like those are what gave me the confidence to seek an ADHD diagnosis.

Anyone reading this comment should be extremely skeptical of internet strangers like Matlin who do not have the condition thinking they know what is best for you. These medications do not work the same way on people who do not have ADHD. I get zero euphoia from these medications, and they got rid of serious insommnia problem. If you don't have ADHD your experience will be far different.

This is junk science you're repeating. There's no validity in claim people who have adhd don't experience euphoria. Some people get more euphoric than others, adhd symptoms or not and surprise stimulants make people more productive.

Except, ya know, the lived experiences of ADHD sufferers like myself. I get zero euphoria from my meds.

The idea that you think people with ADHD are just normal people who have trouble focusing are missing it by a mile. Caffine makes me sleepy.

I got the euphoric/ebullient effect for the first 2-3 weeks of 30mg Adderall XR I was on when I was first diagnosed (and not for the remaining 2 years I was on it). That's the only med I've had that effect from (and I've now trialed all the ADHD medications available). Currently on a low dose of Evekeo and it's the best so far.

Thank for tip towards Evekeo. The lower dextro seems promising. If you can tell (if it’s perceptible) to adderal XR / vyvanse / mydayis or some of the longer release that would be interesting. But will Google regardless :)

Thankfully this living experiences is not how we conduct science. Some people get euphoria and done don't, there is no relationship between someone diagnosed.

Right, I’m extremely add and get euphoria. I also feel a lot of the people who treat this as “my medication” types (they’re common) should realize the worst thing about adderall is that it makes you happy doing stupid menial stuff

Uhhh... no. Like that's not at all how stimulants affect people with ADHD. If you need me to waste 6 straight hours of my life stuffing wedding invitations I'll skip taking my meds that day. Stimulants help me have focus when I am physically unable and let me direct it at at what I want to be doing instead of it being outside my control.

Like it doesn't make you happy. That's silly. If the only issue with me doing menial tasks was that it made me unhappy I would be so much better off because at least I would be able to do the task.

Thank you for posting this. And since these are all basically just anecdotes, I would also like to add mine. I got hooked on anxiety pills after a diagnosis (not the same thing as ADHD, but still), and the withdrawals were genuinely the worst things I've ever faced. Like I wouldn't wish that on my worst enemies. With drugs, especially habit forming ones backed by Big Pharma, you should always be on the side of caution.

Moreover, some of the comments are literally about starting drugs a week or a month ago. God forbid, the long term effects could be entirely different. I started struggling with my dependencies after about a year or so.

Thanks for this, my big fear is the effects of long-term use. I've had friends who were superheroes on Adderall, lost tons of weight, changed their lives. They couldn't see how manic they were.

It is an amphetamine. Go to r/ADHD and read the thousands of enthusiastic stories of people that just took it for the first time and are basically just high. I took medication for a while and it helped me surmount a bunch of issues. Now I can do well without. I never liked the effect on my body and mind.

The effect doesn't go away, you just start expecting more of yourself. Without medication I was really happy if I could focus 30 minutes in a day, that would have been like a once a month event. On medication I feel like shit if I just got 4 productive hours on a day. So sure not every day is like the first days after you start, but it never goes down to even close the level you are at without medication.

> Moreover, some of the comments are literally about starting drugs a week or a month ago

Yes and note that you know that. We're aware that long term things might change, so we point out that we're only a week in. Use your judgement from there, add as many pinches of salt as you like.

Additionally people new to a thing are WAY more likely to talk about it than others, because it is new and novel and interesting to discuss. See also: vegan, keto, crossfit, peloton, etc. Old timers tend to jump in when there's misinformation, but aside from that they stick to the sides.

I've been over a magnitude more productive for many years thanks to medication. That it can't have massive long term impact is just nonsense. It doesn't make focusing trivial, but it makes focusing possible and that is all I need. If I was diagnosed earlier I'd not have wasted a decade of my life, but at least I can do stuff now.

As as person who got diagnosed with ADHD as an adult and looked back to a life of potential wasted, and while I don’t agree with calling the benefits of any drug “superpowers”, I can understand why some people would. I exercise almost every day, meditate, eat and sleep well and yet, it was a pill that made the biggest difference in treating my difficult on keeping focus.

Same (19) BUT arguably if you need X, take more than X, then adjust to Y because of that unneeded “boost” it would sort of be a fair criticism.

But agree, can do all the above plus therapy and support / plan, and it’s not even comparable.

I feel it’s like eyeglasses and I’m being told “you can see it if you squint! It’s clear to me”. Well yeah, but would rather have eyeglasses

There are a lot of positive anecdotes in threads like this because, shock of shocks, a field which is well known for having people get into it because of obsessive interest-chasing in their teen years is also dominated by people who fit the diagnostic criteria of ADHD, and also shock of shocks, medication known to help people with those criteria tend to help a lot of people in that field.

This post is just conspiracy thinking. You're far more likely to find people dissuading you from accepting an ADHD diagnosis in your life than people encouraging you. Even doctors don't really like to give a diagnosis of it unless you really clearly fit into a particular hyperactive bucket.

> Taking these drugs will make anyone feel more focused, motivated, etc because these drugs are strong stimulants that cause euphoria, focus, and bursts of energy.

This is incorrect. If anything I'm more calm, definitely nowhere near what you describe. I'm happy, but just that. I've been happy before, I've been high as balls before. This is the former.

I'm (with my doc) finding the lowest dose that works. I'm sure if I took 4 or 5 of these in the one I'd be bouncing off the walls, but that's not the plan.

Just like someone lacking insulin needs an insulin shot, someone lacking in stimulation needs stimulant medication.

> Anecdotally, I've seen a huge uptick in posts of the format

Ya being in mostly-isolated lockdown for over a year fucks with you mentally, wherever your starting point is.

Anecdotally back it just takes one person in a community to figure it out and get a diagnosis for everyone else who exhibit similar behaviours to start thinking "wait that is a symptom too??" and get checked out. New relationship energy then fuels the desire to spread the word to anyone else who might be suffering.

Anecdotally I’ve worn a chest strap monitor and tracked HRV over several days at work. Much calmer.

But drink coffee and mix? Bad news bears.

Also don't forget that drugs have changed the life to the better for so many on the ADHD spectrum.

Though drugs are only part of the solution for most people with ADHD, it's almost always what enables other kinds of intervention to be effective.

For me, medication doesn't work too well. I tolerate it just fine, but it just isn't as effective as for most people.

It has still changed my life completely. I can accrue life experience in a way that was impossible before, probably as I had basically no perception of time before medication.

Maybe my daughter put it best when she (on her own volition) got diagnosed at 17'ish: "It great to not have to feel like you are going to die tomorrow." With which she meant that when you perceive time passing, you can also perceive the future ahead.

It's not the only thing that changed, and not all change has been easy. But the diagnosis has still been one of the most important things in my life, even getting it as late as at 36 years.

It's interesting to me that your daughter phrased it that way. There's actually a ton of research (some old, some new) about perception of time among ADHD sufferers and how that affects modern life. In a nutshell, the idea seems to be that there's a shorter time horizon (ADHD folks can only see or imagine themselves so far into the future) which is what makes long-term planning, budgeting, etc so difficult and why many are also seen as procrastinators or bad with money. Hop on any research database or google scholar and give it a look. You'll also find in that research an overwhelming bias towards studying younger folks. We're only recently starting to understand how missing diagnoses affect adult livelihoods.

Anecdote: I'm one of those who tried behavioral approaches for years before agreeing to try medication. I bounced back and forth between different types and doses and ended up on small, regular doses of adderall because I could have some control over when it tapers off. I'm disheartened by the smugness of commentary here from people who see nothing but stimulant abuse.

To give a solid example of why it can sometimes be seen as giving you superpowers, consider my experience: I have three degrees. I was in graduate school for...far too long. Anthropology isn't a quick in and out. I could wrap my head around anything, but sitting and writing multiple drafts of 50-100 page papers regularly was unimaginably difficult. I loved writing, and I wasn't sure why it was so challenging for me. Several years ago, I had the "opportunity" to write an NSF grant with (read: for) a pretty famous researcher. The downside is that when I was asked to write it, I was told the deadline was in four days. I spent some time setting up a perfect writing environment with no distractions, comfortable lighting, and everything I could think of, but when I was working, I could almost physically feel my brain constantly switching to some other track. It was deeply upsetting. The following year, I finally gave in to my doctor's medication recommendation. When I first sat down to read an article in a journal while medicated, the only thing I could hear in my head while reading was my own voice reading the words on the page. It actually brought me to tears because I realized that was probably what everyone else was able to experience normally. The glasses analogy everyone is using? Yeah, it's a bit like that, but imagine being in your 30s not even knowing that you can't see properly until someone put glasses on you. It changes your entire perception of the world and your place in it. It makes small things seem like superpowers. Like you finally have the ability to do all the things you're expected to do as a productive member of society. It's liberating. At the same time, all I can think about is how much more I might have been able to achieve if people had considered putting me in some sort of treatment as a kid rather than telling me that I wasn't working hard enough and making fun of other kids with ADHD.

Can you link the time horizon, that’s super interesting. At least most YouTube medical lectures I’ve watch sort of focused on the norepinephrine reputake inhibition and how dopamine in the (forget the name) chain somehow hinders task ability.

The concept to search for here is 'time blindness'

Also be extremely skeptical of internet strangers telling you that you DON'T need medication or vaccines or therapy.

> Anecdotally, I've seen a huge uptick in posts of the format "how an ADHD diagnosis changed my life"

You are seeing an uptick because admitting to being neuroatypical is now far more acceptable. Similar to how "there are so many more people claiming to be gay/trans/bi" on Reddit isn't suspicious either.

The meds changed my life because I have ADHD. My dad's heart medication changed his life (well, gave him a life) because he has congestive heart disease.

My GP became much more relaxed about my medication when I reported that my medications DIDN'T result in euphoria or bursts of energy as that is often the case with ADHD. I am simply much more focused.

I have ADHD diagnosed by a neuropsychiatrist and I've tried a handful of medications now. Currently I have Concerta, methylphenidate, and only on the largest dosage allowed do I even see any effects.

The effects were underwhelming to say the least. I literally could procrastinate with more focus, but my thoughts were just as scattered and I noticed myself veering off topic faster than I'd normally do.

I guess I, like many others, would benefit from some coping mechanisms and therapy perhaps instead of or in addition to medication. I wish it were a miracle pill, but it only seems to be it for some.

One of the things I learned pretty quickly is that it gave me the ability to focus better on anything, but my lack of prioritization skills became more noticeable. So yeah, it helps you focus, but you still have to practice picking what you should be focusing on.

For what it's worth, I started by trying ritalin and didn't like it. Like you, small doses of methylphenidate did the trick, but affected my mood too much. Once I learned some other coping strategies, I tried adderall again and find it to be extremely effective now. After you level up those other skills, talk to your neuro again if you feel the medication isn't actually helping.

Yeah I definitely need to work on how I actually work and create a mindset and space that supports that. But for me, only the maximum dosage of methylphenidate had any effect. I've heard of people getting the gurn on it and obviously it's a decent amount of speed for anybody, so I haven't felt comfortable continuing on it.

At my last company engineers openly bragged about strategies to get prescriptions and increase dosages. I find this behavior reprehensible.

If they were my reports I would have fired them.

Why?

People use all kinds of substances: caffeine, alcohol, nicotine, marijuana, modafinil, a myriad of sleeping pills, antidepressants, and painkillers. At different points in time some of them have been banned or regulated, at others available to everyone. As things stand some of them require a prescription from a doctor.

In the vast majority of cases there's little danger to at least trying out stimulants like Adderall or methylphenidate, or substances like modafinil. If people want to try them I think they should be free to do so. If they have to jump through some hoops I see no reason to frown upon it.

Their body, their choice.

People abusing ADHD medication like that is the reason that the medication is so tightly controlled and hard to get as someone who actually has ADHD though.

It stops being "Their body, their choice." when tangible harm is being caused to people who actually need the medication to treat a neurodevelopmental disorder.

You get 30 pills for 30 days. I can’t buy alcohol on Sunday morning either, and I get the personal freedom aspect, but it’s very predominantly used in children, CVS literally has one variant that’s just “methamphetamine” (a hilarious generic), so having some constraint seems reasonable.

This isn't a "personal freedom" thing for me.

I'm talking as someone who was denied medical treatment for 7 years because the first specialist I saw assumed, based on my age, that I was trying to scam them for a prescription.

Those years were basically lost, and that wouldn't have happened if there wasn't so many people seeking phony diagnoses.

After moving halfway across the country in 2013, I had trouble finding a doctor who would prescribe Vyvanse - after having been on if for years and basically relying on it to remain productive.

If not for the exact discussions you’re speaking about at work, I would likely have ended up unemployed.

I can’t agree with your anecdote. Your previous doctor could have forwarded your medical records.

If multiple doctors are of the opinion they won’t prescribe it I don’t think that justifies drug seeking behavior.

You clearly have never experienced medical gatekeeping. It can be really frustrating to be forced to change doctors or insurance and have to fight for years to continue the treatment regimen that actually works for you.

Your PCP is the tier-1 tech support of the medical world. They have basically zero specialized knowledge to evaluate different medications outside the brochure the sales rep gave them. There's a reason PCP's punt the responsibility for a diagnosis to a psychologist and then play the game of "spin the wheel of stimulants" to find something that both alleviates their symptoms and has tolerable side-effects. Having to go through the process all again for no reason other than weird politics or a doctor on a power-trip is the worst.

Ugh.

Rather presumptive to think I haven’t been through the medical system or ran into bad doctors. My experiences will be left as an exercise to the reader.

You get medical records sent and see multiple doctors until one is aware of your ailment. Strategizing on how to lie is unacceptable to me. Happy to agree to disagree on this one.

If one of my reports used work resources to collude for substance abuse I would do everything I can to fire them.

So "lying to get a treatment that alleviates the symptoms of their medical condition in a system that punishes honesty" is substance abuse now?

I literally wish every time I go to the doctor that stimulants didn't get non-ADHD people high so I wouldn't have to deal with this crap.

> If one of my reports used work resources to collude for substance abuse I would do everything I can to fire them.

They actually used work resources to discuss medical treatments so firing them over this would likely be very illegal.

> Strategizing on how to lie is unacceptable to me.

Where are you getting this? Who lied?

> My experiences will be left as an exercise to the reader.

I assume that you've sought medical care and been criticized for it, and now spread that unfortunate rhetoric to others?

He did. The state discouraged prescribing it.

I wasn’t seeking “drug seeking”, I was seeking the only medical intervention that I’ve found that ameliorates a diagnosed condition.

You really equate that with someone looking to get high?

I was under the impression that without peer coaching you couldn’t get a prescription. If state guidelines are at fault how did you find a in state doctor sympathetic?

I apologize but I can’t get over the notion it’s drug seeking and/or doctor shopping.

I must assume that there was a reason for the doctor not wanting to prescribe you that medication. If state guidelines were the true root why was another doctor amenable?

Using performance enhancing drugs is a losing game. It makes it harder for those who wish to use their natural cognitive abilities.

In time it forces everyone to dope up.

>Using performance enhancing drugs is a losing game. It makes it harder for those who wish to use their natural cognitive abilities. >In time it forces everyone to dope up.

With all due respect, say less things like this.

You're wrong -the drugs treat a medical condition. Its not "doping" or "performance enhancing".

> It makes it harder for those who wish to use their natural cognitive abilities

Our society is full of people enhancing their natural abilities... with things like cars and escalators and calculators. Treating a medical condition is fixing a medical "flaw" but it is NOT some sort of get-ahead scheme.

This sort of diminutive language leaves people feeling bad about themselves instead of seeking adequate medical treatment.

> I was under the impression that without peer coaching you couldn’t get a prescription. If state guidelines are at fault how did you find a in state doctor sympathetic?

I think you’re misunderstanding - I had an existing, active prescription for Vyvanse when I moved into the state. It took me months to find a doctor who would refill it for me. I had already been through years of counseling at that point.

> I must assume that there was a reason for the doctor not wanting to prescribe you that medication. If state guidelines were the true root why was another doctor amenable?

The state “looked more closely” at doctors who prescribe stimulants. Basically none of the doctors I spoke to in the beginning was willing to add another prescription to their practice because of this.

> Using performance enhancing drugs is a losing game. It makes it harder for those who wish to use their natural cognitive abilities.

How does this logic not apply to cardiac drugs? It “makes it harder for those who wish to use their natural cardiac abilities”?

> "Taking these drugs will make anyone feel more focused, motivated, etc because these drugs are strong stimulants that cause euphoria, focus, and bursts of energy."

Can't speak for others but my encounter with stimulant medications (under the care of a therapist, of course) provided none of those things. It only gave me severe insomnia, which left me worse off than before.

Absolutely. There are some who need this medication to function, but there are many who weren't sure if they needed meds, got prescribed anyway and - surprise - feel a burst of focus and motivation now they're regularly taking stimulants.

> There are some who need this medication to function, but there are many who weren't sure if they needed meds, got prescribed anyway

ADHD medication is heavily controlled. As an adult, it is very hard to get but yes, there are likely people who got it without really needing it.

The wording of this comment ("some" vs "many") makes it seem like the majority of people got it without needing it. This is almost certainly not true due to how strictly it is controlled.

This comment is extremely diminutive and places a lot of assumption in the prescription process of medication.

Different drugs have different effects on different people. People with ADHD are often calmed down by stimulants, at doses that would have “neurotypicals” bouncing off the walls.

The original poster is in therapy, so presumably there is something going on that he or she is unhappy with.

Theoretically, if you have ADHD the medicine shouldn’t make you ‘high’. If you don’t it will have that effect. This was told to me by a specialist (I am dubious though)

That's pretty dubious, especially about 'medicine' in general. If that was true it would double as a surefire test for ADHD. As well, all it takes is a little stronger dose and I know of a friend with ADHD that abuses it to party

The dose is managed to be the minimum that treats your symptoms. A massive dose of amphetamines will obviously get anyone high, but we're talking about the response in a clinically relevant range of doses.

It is Europe and that is what I thought. Aka, anecdotes

This is false - if the dose is high enough with a drug like Adderall or Vyvanse you will get the euphoric and high energy when first starting out. Over the course of a week or two your body adapts and that feeling fades.

This is a common misconception. The euphoria is a transient side-effect. Some people don’t experience much euphoria from amphetamine.

I experienced euphoria for a month or so when I first started treatment, but now it feels similar to a morning cup of coffee.

I'm commenting just to balance out everyone saying this is false. I took Ritalin in middle school and never felt high whatsoever. One day my mom took it (once) because she was curious and she said she felt high (she told me this many many years later).

I took it again after college and can say that yes if you take a high enough dose it will make you slightly euphoric but I think it's different than the high of recreational drugs. If your mood is too heightened when you take it then probably you should cut back on your dosage.

A normal dose can make you high or euphoric the first few times you take it. Eventually your body down-regulates and you don't experience a high, but if you read ADHD experiences on the internet you will often come across people who have just had their first dose and are clearly geeked up.

This is false. I was diagnosed ADHD by a psychologist twice (this is the full ADHD test where they put you through IQ and other cognitive testing). My ADHD was severe enough that I qualified for accommodations on the SATs. I was still able to get high on Vyvanse/Adderall often enough to get addicted to it. Drug companies lie to make these medications seem safer than they are.

That's really interesting to me. I take methylphenidate as a (doctor prescribed) stimulant and don't get the euphoria much at all. Maybe a little bit the first time I take an increased dose. 5 mg made me feel drugged and tired the first time. At 10 mg, I very nearly puked at about 2 hours and 4 hours after the dose the first week but no euphoria. I just had a more normal amount of energy compared to how tired I am naturally. 15 mg and I'm pretty bright and alert, but wouldn't call it euphoria by any means. I don't know what a recreational dose is. I just got my prescription upped so that I've got a couple 20 mg doses available. If I have a suspiciously lovely day, I'll let you know. I'm definitely not addicted. I feel no need to take it except when I know I need it to get through the day.

What did give me euphoria and hypo-manic behaviors was Nuvigil at 250 mg after having been off it for 2 weeks. That was an inexperienced mistake on my part, but it was really fun.

I just don't see how people become physically addicted to these drugs. I am on Desoxyn have been for years and at a pretty high dose for a clinical dose. 35mg twice a day. I have went weeks without taking my medication with no ill effect. Not a single withdraw, the only thing that happens is the foggy head comes back and I cannot seem to put one foot in front of the other to get things completed. there is only one company that makes Desoxyn and it always has to be ordered, so I have times that my pharmacy does not have it and no pharmacy stocks it by default because it is pharmaceutical Methamphetamine. I do not take anywhere near a recreational dose, but I cannot for the life of me, understand how people on prescriptions for these class of drugs get junkie level addicted. I don't have any literature to back it up, but I would assume by the street drugs, if any of these meds would be the most addictive, it would be the one whos active ingredient is methamphetamine. I just go oh well it's going to suck for a week and not much will get done. Recreational meth users are generally taking anywhere from 100-200mg at recreational doses. For me to take that my months prescription would be used up in about 8 doses. certainly not enough time to develop dependency. So where are these people getting such high doses that they can continually take, to develop physical addition.

I also have no idea why anyone would want to abuse something like Adderall. The levoamphetamine targets the bodies nervous system rather than the brain. On very low therapeutic doses it cause all kinds of peripheral physicals problems for me.

It is also good to keep in mind ADD/ADHD meds have one of the highest success rates in the pharmacological field of psychiatrics care. It's one of psychiatrics success stories and there is a mountain of evidence that supports it. It is sad that it is still stigmatized as just wanting to get high. I avoided treatment for years due to that. Not accepting the proven track record of stimulant based treatment for ADD/ADHD is doing a lot of harm to a lot of people. Is it over diagnosed sure, but that does not negate that it does work for people who suffer focus disorders.

Oh, I wasn't physically dependent. But taking it at a young age contributed to a polysubstance abuse disorder. I have no issue with adults taking ADD meds by the way. I just don't like the way it's prescribed to kids so frequently (I was on it when I was 9). I'm not sure why the fact that it's evidence based matters because I never questioned that it works (I've taken it more than enough times to know that it works, lol). I'm questioning whether the pros outweigh the cons from a holistic, social perspective.

Yep. As someone who has been taking these medications for over a decade, I can say the danger of physical and mental addiction is very real. I've also stopped medication several times over this period and the withdrawal can last weeks or months.

Have also done breaks and it’s hard, but it’s confounded with the accompanying massive drop in life functioning. I’d argue it’s 50/50 but anecdotally. The research on street addiction of amphetamine (think homeless not Ivy League SAT prep) and recovery is fairly robust. Doable but hard.

Even as Americans we find these amusing. They tell you to "ask you doctor about x." Does anyone do that ever?

They're also unintentionally hilarious now that they can't read the side effects at super speed, so 50% of the commercial is watching someone play with their dog while you learn that this allergy medicine is going to give you diarrhea and suicidal thoughts and maybe a heart attack.

They must work somehow because they're clearly dumping so much money in them.

I'll bite. I actually figured out I had narcolepsy through a pharmaceutical company's big campaign to push a couple newer drugs they have the patents for. "Are you more than tired?". Well, yes. I'm tired all the time and a couple times a week have bouts where I'm staring at a concrete floor thinking I could just lay down and go to sleep. But I don't have narcolepsy. I'm not that tired. I don't pass out randomly. I can still work long hours at a physical job. I just occasionally have to muster all my willpower not to lay down and sleep in the middle of the store. And I haven't been able to watch an entire movie without falling asleep in the first hour in a very long time.

Took the chintzy little quiz and I figured I might as well ask my doctor. A couple sleep studies and an MSLT test and what do you know?

Narcolepsy is not about passing out randomly, most doze off very quickly when doing simple or repetitive things. If you also have cataplexy there is hardly any question. Read more about it, join a local group the symptoms are very divers.

Actually, yes.

I take a medication that's routinely advertised. When they advertised an updated formula for it, I did ask my doctor if we should consider it. Turns out, it's not covered by the insurance, so, not today. But if it were, we'd certainly be considering it. Doctors are pretty notorious for the "if it's not broke, don't fix it", and leaving things as they lay, rather than bombarding patients with "the latest options". So, it can help patients interested in the condition to talk about these sorts of things.

Also, when my doctor proposed the medication, it helped I already had some indirect familiarity with it.

I sympathize with the caricature of medical advertising, and even advertising in general. We all "hate" advertising, but we all rely on it. Everyone pauses at an ad that catches their eye in some way.