But I've changed my phrasing, just to be clear.
I don't want to get addicted to another thing in my life, here in Europe we're quite familiar with (ab)using speed (amphetamine paste) and the idea of being on speed every single day seems pretty bad.
I don't feel "more like myself" on speed and I seriously doubt most positive effect would persist after a year of using and rising tolerance.
Why? Just because it comes in a pill form, instead of being conspicuous, doesn't make it any less of a help for a medical condition.
> I don't want to get addicted to another thing in my life,
The point of this comparison is that "being addicted to" ADHD meds is not in the category of "being addicted to heroine" - it's in the category of "being addicted to a wheelchair" when you could technically just use your hands to crawl around and grab things, instead of aiding yourself with technology.
> the idea of being on speed every single day seems pretty bad
Stimulant medication aren't speed, they're like "1/100 speed". It turns out that with medicine (not just psychiatric), the effects don't scale linearly or continuously with dose size. That's why those meds are helpful and safe to take in therapeutic doses, despite being technically dangerous, addictive drugs in much larger drug abuser doses.
> I seriously doubt most positive effect would persist after a year of using and rising tolerance.
Countless of people who have been treating their ADHD with stimulant medication continuously, for years or decades, will beg to disagree.
Nobody says you have to take meds for ADHD treatment, or that you have to take stimulants (there are other options available, although typically less effective). Hell, on some people with ADHD, stimulants don't work at all, or side effects are not worth the cost. But comparing them to speed is just wrong and irresponsible, as it makes people afraid of trying what could be effective treatment.
Seems pretty strange that I should take your sourceless claims as gospel over theirs.
>Stimulant medication aren't speed, they're like "1/100 speed".
These are literally two identical substances with almost identical effects (the only difference is the ration of amph salts). Difference is dosage.
Can't understand why would you claim what you say, when Adderall is used and abused in the same exact manner as amphetamine paste is in Europe. Anecdotally I hear in USA they throw it at you like candy.
>But comparing them to speed is just wrong and irresponsible,
I stand by what I said, if you saw the numbers of amphetamine addicts on the street in USA the same way you see opoid addicts, you would have a different national perspective on these drugs.
>it makes people afraid of trying what could be effective treatment
Yes, they should be cautions in my opinion.
I personally am not taking any new chances with addiction, even though I'm sure I would have benefits, at least short term.
I'll just hobble along. Using crutches can make physical rehabilitation impossible.
Excuse me? There's roughly 60 years of research into the effectiveness of stimulants as a treatment for ADHD. It is probably the single best researched psychiatric drug.
While it's always useful to discuss a proven treatments relevance in the light of newly discovered alternatives, there really is no (significant) doubt in the scientific community about the effectiveness of stimulants. Given the body of evidence, I would say it's more fair to ask you to add some citations to your comments.
> These are literally two identical substances
Yes, they are. That doesn't mean that in patients with a dopamine dysregulation they don't have great therapeutic effect. One could call the euphoria nothing but an unfortunate side-effect leading to abuse in the general population.
> numbers of amphetamine addicts
So, there are addicts. That has nothing to do with therapeutic use.
> Yes, they should be cautions in my opinion.
Since they aren't prescribed to self-diagnosed ADHD patients, there should always be a doctor involved. And I can tell you the titration and monitoring is taken quite seriously, at least where I'm from.
> Using crutches can make physical rehabilitation impossible.
If you're missing a leg, that rehabilitation is going to take a long long time. As will be the case with ADHD. You might learn to cope better, but your symptoms aren’t going anywhere. ADHD isn’t something that generally gets better with age, although better coping skills may mean some people don’t experience as much of an impact on life.
And yes, stimulants are a crutch, but they do help people function better despite their disability.
So instead of focusing on bespoke medications we try to ban them all if a small percentage of people have addictive natures or negative side effects.
How about we agree that drugs can be beneficial and harmful, but keep them legal for the large percentage of people it actually helps.
Not every disability is visible. By definition they have a significant impact on someones life, as such there isn’t use for competition.
A wheelchair is a great comparison. Both enable someone to do something they previously couldn’t. Both are temporary, and stop being useful when removed. Both have a very different effect on someone who does not need them.
> I don't want to get addicted to another thing in my life FWIW, among those I know with ADHD taking stimulant meds, addiction is not a concern but remembering to take them is.
> I don't feel "more like myself" on speed
Do you have a deficit of dopamine, serotonin and norepinephrine? If not you’re experience will be very different from someone who does. Even then, some stimulants work better for certain people, and for other only non-stimulants work. Our brains are complex, and our experiences are not universal. Speed is also a pretty catch all term, and the ratios of salts have a huge impact on the effect. It may not be very comparable to pharmaceuticals.
> I seriously doubt most positive effect would persist after a year of using and rising tolerance.
People have been taking stimulants for ADHD for decades, but I think its effect is not what you think to an ADHD brain. It’s more akin to reading glasses.
What evidence exists that points this is the cause of ADHD? Wouldn't a dopamine deficit be more akin to Parkinson's Disease?
Also, last I remember reading, I am pretty sure we are not fully aware of why stimulants help people with ADHD. I think the leading hypothesis is that dopamine plays a role somehow, but I thought that he yet to be fully observed.
I don't give a shit about my job but it allowed me to buy a house, take vacations and sometimes buy an extensive toy.
I would gladly stay in my own world and daydream away, doing some woodworking and see birds in my garden but if I lose my job all that will go away.
So I take my ~3€/day pill and try to do my best. I've lost so many opportunities before getting diagnosed...
I'd only manage that for about two days before giving up without the meds, heh
It allowed me to stop eating my feelings (which allowed me to lose 13kg and counting), made me stop drinking, I still play games but can stop whenever.
I know I will surely have to take it my whole life (days I don't, I'm a wreck) but I see it as a diabetic needing insuline.
Or if you dislike thinking of it as a disability (even if there’s nothing morally wrong with being disabled): a pair of glasses.
Do we really think less of people (or in this case likely ourselves) for using a wheelchair or wearing glasses?