<p>Teachers first suggested that my son had ADD back in 2nd grade and every year since. I have a PH.D. in neuroscience and was adamantly opposed to exposing my child’s developing brain to psychoactive drugs with no long term studies to validate their safety. For the next 9 years he meandered through school, losing, forgetting and unmotivated. He is smart so he always tested highly and managed to overcome the disorganization and get good grades. Then he tested into a very demanding math and science magnet school and was challenged for the first time. His teachers sent notices about homework missing etc. and he really struggled to manage his time. I still resisted because I believed he would mature into organization and grow out of it. Last fall, it finally broke my resolve to see my big son looking down at me with tears of frustration rolling down his face. We had him tested and he started on ritalin at the beginning of this year. Now he is firing on all cylinders, doing great, handling it all with ease. The yawning chasm of failure has receded and he is moving confidently forward with his life. The medicine turned him into a person with a different trajectory.
But which student is the real student. The unmedicated one with insufficient dopamine in the basal forebrain, or the student whose dopamine levels have been corrected. We accept refractive lenses to correct the focus of objects on the retina. We accept insulin to correct blood sugar levels. People with ADHD have lower than normal dopamine levels, is it not OK to correct that? I still wrestle with this question.
The colleges to which he will apply next fall will see two and a half years of good grades and a half a year of great grades. Do they care who is the real student? Will they accept his ritalin just like his eyeglasses or are these drugs instant red flags to admissions officers. He has issues about taking the drugs and keeps it to himself.He does not want to admit that he needs them to do his best.
As the many comments illustrate, this is a hot button topic. What are the admissions repercussions if any?</p>
<p>I highly doubt any admissions officer would look on taking necessary medication (even medications with controversy surrounding them) in a negative way. In fact, I suspect that explaining his diagnosis of ADHD would be beneficial in helping adcoms to understand the jump in grades, and could help him if they assume (as I suspect they will) that the latter, great student version with the correct treatment is the one they will see as a freshman at college.</p>
<p>I don’t recall ever seeing a place on a college admission forms that requires you to list your prescription medications, but my kids weren’t yet taking any when they left for college. So I may not have noticed. Does anyone recall anything differently? </p>
<p>There’s a health examination required from one’s home medical doctor, but that happens over the summer as part of the preparation to live oncampus in the Fall, long after the magical month of May. Acceptances and return commitments from the students are all done by then.</p>
<p>tmdel.cashel
“People with ADHD have lower than normal dopamine levels”</p>
<p>That sounds like a theory…am I right, or do you have a peer reviewed source for that? I’m just curious since i like to think I keep up to date on this stuff.</p>
<p>“the student whose dopamine levels have been corrected.”…as much as I beleive in treating ADHD, I’m sure my son would say the “corrected” him, is not the “real” him. I’m curious about what your son would say.</p>
<p>[That sounds like a theory…am I right, or do you have a peer reviewed source for that? I’m just curious since i like to think I keep up to date on this stuff.]</p>
<p>A psychinfo search on adhd dopamine will bring up many articles on the relation between the two. Here are a few:</p>
<p>1.Further evidence of dopamine transporter dysregulation in ADHD: A controlled PET imaging study using altropane.
Spencer, Thomas J.; Biederman, Joseph; Madras, Bertha K.; Dougherty, Darin D.; Bonab, Ali A.; Livni, Elijahu; Meltzer, Peter C.; Martin, Jessica; Rauch, Scott; Fischman, Alan J…
Biological Psychiatry (0006-3223)
Nov 2007. Vol.62,Iss.9;p.1059-1061
Source: PsycINFO 1887-Current
Show Abstract | Show In Clusters
Background: The dopamine transporter (DAT) is known to be a key regulator of dopamine, and recent studies of genetics, treatment, and imaging have highlighted the role of DAT in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). The findings of in vivo neuroimaging of DAT in ADHD have been somewhat discrepant, however. Method: Dopamine transporter binding was measured using a highly selective ligand (C-11 altropane) and positron emission tomography (PET). The sample consisted of 47 well-characterized, treatment-naive, nonsmoking, non-comorbid adults with and without ADHD. Additionally, control subjects had few symptoms of ADHD. Results: Results showed significantly increased DAT binding in the right caudate in adults with ADHD compared with matched control subjects without this disorder. Conclusions: These results confirm abnormal DAT binding in the striatum of adults with ADHD and provide further support that dysregulation of DAT may be an important component of the pathophysiology of ADHD. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2007 APA, all rights reserved)
More full text options:</p>
<p>2.Association and linkage of allelic variants of the dopamine transporter gene in ADHD.
Friedel, S.; Saar, K.; Sauer, S.; Dempfle, A.; Walitza, S.; Renner, T.; Romanos, M.; Freitag, C.; Seitz, C.; Palmason, H.; Scherag, A.; Windemuth-Kieselbach, C.; Schimmelmann, B. G.; Wewetzer, C.; Meyer, J.; Warnke, A.; Lesch, K. P.; Reinhardt, R.; Herpertz-Dahlmann, B.; Linder, M.; Hinney, A.; Remschmidt, H.; Schafer, H.; Konrad, K.; Hubner, N.; Hebebrand, J…
Molecular Psychiatry (1359-4184)
Oct 2007. Vol.12,Iss.10;p.923-933
Source: PsycINFO 1887-Current
Show Abstract | Show In Clusters
Previously, we had reported a genome-wide scan for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in 102 families with affected sibs of German ancestry; the highest multipoint LOD score of 4.75 was obtained on chromosome 5p13 (parametric HLOD analysis under a dominant model) near the dopamine transporter gene (DAT1). We genotyped 30 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in this candidate gene and its 5’ region in 329 families (including the 102 initial families) with 523 affected offspring. We found that (1) SNP rs463379 was significantly associated with ADHD upon correction for multiple testing (P = 0.0046); (2) the global P-value for association of haplotypes was significant for block two upon correction for all (n = 3) tested blocks (P = 0.0048); (3) within block two we detected a nominal P = 0.000034 for one specific marker combination. This CGC haplotype showed relative risks of 1.95 and 2.43 for heterozygous and homozygous carriers, respectively; and (4) finally, our linkage data and the genotype-IBD sharing test (GIST) suggest that genetic variation at the DAT1 locus explains our linkage peak and that rs463379 (P < 0.05) is the only SNP of the above haplotype that contributed to the linkage signal. In sum, we have accumulated evidence that genetic variation at the DAT1 locus underlies our ADHD linkage peak on chromosome 5; additionally solid association for a single SNP and a haplotype were shown. Future studies are required to assess if variation at this locus also explains other positive linkage results obtained for chromosome 5p. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2007 APA, all rights reserved)
More full text options:</p>
<p>3.Motor inhibitory role of dopamine D1 receptors: Implications for ADHD.
Heijtz, Rochellys Diaz; Kolb, Bryan; Forssberg, Hans.
Physiology & Behavior (0031-9384)
Sep 2007. Vol.92;p.155-160
Source: PsycINFO 1887-Current
Show Abstract | Show In Clusters
Dysregulation of dopamine (DA) neurotransmission in frontal-striatal circuitry has been hypothesized to underlie several neurodevelopmental disorders, including attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). The actions of DA are mediated by five distinct receptor subtypes that belong to the G-protein-coupled receptor super-family and are divided into two major classes, D1-like (D1 and D5) and D2-like (D2, D3, and D4). Accumulating evidence implicates the D1 receptor subtype (D1R) in the regulation of motor and cognitive processes. It is generally assumed that D1R is linked to motor activity in a stimulatory fashion. However, recent findings in rodents suggest a potential role of D1R on motor inhibition, which emerges during late postnatal development. Several lines of evidence indicate that the locus of the inhibitory effects involve subregions of the prefrontal cortex (PFC). These results may be relevant for understanding the neurobiology of ADHD. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2007 APA, all rights reserved)</p>
<p>4.Association of 4-repeat allele of the dopamine D4 receptor gene exon III polymorphism and response to methylphenidate treatment in Korean ADHD children.
Cheon, Keun-Ah; Kim, Boong-Nyun; Cho, Soo-Churl.
Neuropsychopharmacology (0893-133X)
Jun 2007. Vol.32,Iss.6;p.1377-1383
Source: PsycINFO 1887-Current
Show Abstract | Show In Clusters
[Correction Notice: An erratum for this article was reported in Vol 32(6) of Neuropsychopharmacology (see record 2007-07759-025). The third sentence of the abstract should read 'An improvement of more than or equal to 50% in the ADHD Rating Scale-IV (ARS) scores after 8 weeks of treatment compared with the baseline ARS scores before the treatment was considered as a ‘good response’, whereas an improvement of less than 50% was considered as a ‘poor response’. The first sentence under the subhead ‘DRD4-Exon3 Genotype Determination’ should read ‘The DRD4-exon III repeat region was genotyped by a PCR-based length polymorphism’.] In the present study, we investigated the association between the 4-repeat allele at the dopamine receptor D4 (DRD4) gene and the response to treatment with methylphenidate (MPH) in Korean children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). The study subjects were 83 children with ADHD (8.40 +/- 1.73 years) who were recruited from two child psychiatric clinics in South Korea. All of the drug-naive ADHD children were treated with MPH for about 8 weeks. An improvement of more than 50% in the ADHD Rating Scale-IV (ARS) scores after 8 weeks of treatment compared with the baseline ARS scores before the treatment was considered as a ‘good response’, whereas an improvement of less than (or equal to?) 50% was considered as a ‘poor response’. After the genotyping for DRD4 was performed, we investigated the association between the genotype at DRD4 and the response to MPH treatment. We performed a comparison of the response to MPH treatment between the two largest groups, viz. the subjects with and without the 4/4 genotype at DRD4. According to the ARS scores of the subjects as assessed by their parents and by their teachers, we found that while 71.1 and 80.0% (32/45 and 24/30), respectively, of those with a good response to MPH treatment showed the 4/4 genotype at DRD4, only 31.6 and 37.7% (12/38 and 20/53), respectively, of those with a poor response to MPH treatment showed the 4/4 genotype at DRD4 (Pearson χ^2 -values = 12.926 and 13.737, respectively, both df = 1, and both p <0.01). Our findings support the existence of an association between the 4-repeat allele at DRD4 and good response to MPH in Korean ADHD children. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2007 APA, all rights reserved)
More full text options:</p>
<p>5.‘Association of 4-repeat allele of the dopamine D4 receptor gene exon III polymorphism and response to methylphenidate treatment in Korean ADHD children’: Corrigendum.
Cheon, Keun-Ah; Kim, Boong-Nyun; Cho, Soo-Churl.
Neuropsychopharmacology (0893-133X)
Jun 2007. Vol.32,Iss.6;p.1431
Source: PsycINFO 1887-Current
Show Abstract | Show In Clusters
Reports an error in “Association of 4-repeat allele of the dopamine D4 receptor gene exon III polymorphism and response to methylphenidate treatment in Korean ADHD children” by (Neuropsychopharmacology, 2007[Jun], Vol 32[6], 0). The third sentence of the abstract should read 'An improvement of more than or equal to 50% in the ADHD Rating Scale-IV (ARS) scores after 8 weeks of treatment compared with the baseline ARS scores before the treatment was considered as a ‘good response’, whereas an improvement of less than 50% was considered as a ‘poor response’. The first sentence under the subhead ‘DRD4-Exon3 Genotype Determination’ should read ‘The DRD4-exon III repeat region was genotyped by a PCR-based length polymorphism’. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 2007-07759-018). In the present study, we investigated the association between the 4-repeat allele at the dopamine receptor D4 (DRD4) gene and the response to treatment with methylphenidate (MPH) in Korean children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). The study subjects were 83 children with ADHD (8.40+/-1.73 years) who were recruited from two child psychiatric clinics in South Korea. All of the drug-naive ADHD children were treated with MPH for about 8 weeks. An improvement of more than 50% in the ADHD Rating Scale-IV (ARS) scores after 8 weeks of treatment compared with the baseline ARS scores before the treatment was considered as a ‘good response’, whereas an improvement of less than (or equal to?) 50% was considered as a ‘poor response’. After the genotyping for DRD4 was performed, we investigated the association between the genotype at DRD4 and the response to MPH treatment. We performed a comparison of the response to MPH treatment between the two largest groups, viz. the subjects with and without the 4/4 genotype at DRD4. According to the ARS scores of the subjects as assessed by their parents and by their teachers, we found that while 71.1 and 80.0% (32/45 and 24/30), respectively, of those with a good response to MPH treatment showed the 4/4 genotype at DRD4, only 31.6 and 37.7% (12/38 and 20/53), respectively, of those with a poor response to MPH treatment showed the 4/4 genotype at DRD4 (Pearson χ^2 -values = 12.926 and 13.737, respectively, both df = 1, and both p<0.01). Our findings support the existence of an association between the 4-repeat allele at DRD4 and good response to MPH in Korean ADHD children. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2007 APA, all rights reserved)
More full text options:</p>
<p>6.Dopamine transporter 3’-UTR VNTR genotype and ADHD: A pharmaco-behavioural genetic study with methylphenidate.
Joober, Ridha; Grizenko, Natalie; Sengupta, Sarojini; Amor, Leila Ben; Schmitz, Norbert; Schwartz, George; Karama, Sherif; Lageix, Philippe; Fathalli, Ferid; Torkaman-Zehi, Adam; Stepanian, Marina Ter.
Neuropsychopharmacology (0893-133X)
Jun 2007. Vol.32,Iss.6;p.1370-1376
Source: PsycINFO 1887-Current
Show Abstract | Show In Clusters
We sought to test the hypothesis that the variable number of tandem repeat (VNTR) polymorphism in the 3’-untranslated region (3’-UTR) of the SLC6A3 gene modulates behavior in children with ADHD and/or behavioral response to methylphenidate (MPH). One hundred and fifty-nine children with AHDH (6-12 years) were assessed with regard to the Conners’ Global Index for parents (CGI-Parents) and teachers (CGI-Teachers) and the response of these behaviors to MPH (0.5 mg/kg/day) using a 2-week prospective within-subject (crossover) trial. Based on CGI-Parents, the profile of behavioral response to MPH as compared to placebo was not parallel in the three groups of children separated according to their genotype in the 3’-UTR VNTR polymorphism of SLC6A3, as indicated by a significant (p = 0.017) genotype by treatment two-way interaction. Individuals having the 9/10 and 10/10 genotypes displayed a significant positive response to MPH as opposed to those homozygous for the 9-repeat allele. No genotype or genotype by treatment interaction was observed for CGI-Teachers. These findings support a role for the DAT gene 3’-UTR VNTR polymorphism in modulating the response of some behavioral dimensions to MPH in children with ADHD. They also suggest the presence of genetic heterogeneity that could be indexed by the quality of behavioral response to MPH. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2007 APA, all rights reserved)
More full text options:</p>
<p>7.Confirmation that a specific haplotype of the dopamine transporter gene is associated with combined-type ADHD.
Asherson, Philip; Brookes, Keeley; Franke, Barbara; Chen, Wai; Gill, Michael; Ebstein, Richard P.; Buitelaar, Jan; Banaschewski, Tobias; Sonuga-Barke, Edmund; Eisenberg, Jacques; Manor, Iris; Miranda, Ana; Oades, Robert D.; Roeyers, Herbert; Rothenberger, Aribert; Sergeant, Joseph; Steinhausen, Hans-Christoph; Faraone, Stephen V…
American Journal of Psychiatry (0002-953X)
Apr 2007. Vol.164,Iss.4;p.674-677
Source: PsycINFO 1887-Current
Show Abstract | Show In Clusters
Objective: The primary purpose of this study was to confirm the association of a specific haplotype of the dopamine transporter gene and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), which could be one source of the heterogeneity seen across published studies. Method: The authors previously reported the association of ADHD with a subgroup of chromosomes containing specific alleles of two variable-number tandem repeat polymorphisms within the 3’ untranslated region and intron 8 of the dopamine transporter gene. They now report on this association in a sample of ADHD combined-type probands. Results: The original observations were confirmed, with an overall odds ratio of 1.4 across samples. Conclusions: These data challenge results of meta-analyses suggesting that dopamine transporter variation does not have an effect on the risk for ADHD, and they indicate that further investigation of functional variation in the gene is required. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2007 APA, all rights reserved)
More full text options:</p>
<p>I will look further at those, but I can’t believe they say “low on dopamine”. I think unless you are good at reading scientific journals ( I REALLY have to focus) it’s not easy to make conclusions. If that’s your thing, don’t hesitate to provide a synopsis. I understand there is often a relationship, but I have not seen anything proving it causal. These are some pretty soft conclusions, and not the same as saying we understand kids are “low on dopamine”</p>
<p>"may be an important component of the pathophysiology of ADHD. "</p>
<p>“Future studies are required to assess if variation at this locus also explains other positive linkage results obtained for chromosome 5p.”</p>
<p>"These results may be relevant for understanding the neurobiology of ADHD. "</p>
<p>“These findings support a role for the DAT gene 3’-UTR VNTR polymorphism in modulating the response of some behavioral dimensions to MPH in children with ADHD. They also suggest the presence of genetic heterogeneity that could be indexed by the quality of behavioral response to MPH”</p>
<p>“These data challenge results of meta-analyses suggesting that dopamine transporter variation does not have an effect on the risk for ADHD, and they indicate that further investigation of functional variation in the gene is required.”</p>
<p>They are exciting studies but ost of the studies seem to be looking for genetic links to treament response. Perhaps they are born from the realization treatment response is often dissappointing, and we are looking for reasons why things that look the same on the surfce, don’t always respond the same to treatment. I still beleive the human experience goes well beyond a chemical imbalance, but hey I can make WAY more money if I don’t talk about it. I’m not sure I want to go into this here, but I will say I wouldn’t accept "chemical-imbalances as anything more than theories. Half the time I am on this forum because of the disputes that rage about that on the Psychiatry forums.</p>
<p>Again, I don’t diasgree about a medical model, nor the “glasses” analogy, I use it often, but I also think it’s important to not suggest we know more than we do.</p>
<p>Well, chemical imbalances is rather vague. I haven’t looked at ADHD since the 90s. I’d guess that it runs in my family but we never went the medication route.</p>
<p>If you take something very difficult like schizophrenia, there are studies showing risk factors like maternal influenza, child-rearing style, being brought up in cities vs rural areas, and of course genetic factors. But find a precise formula, or even a vague formula has been elusive. There are investigations into receptors (I think that’s the right term) with very interesting results but much more work still needs to be done. One could work on limiting exposure to the flu when pregnant if there’s a family history but that would take a fair amount of education of the population.</p>
<p>From the posters here on ADHD meds, it would appear that they can be remarkably effective. I assume that there are some side effects so some analysis has to be done but it seems that the benefits far outweigh the costs for many.</p>
<p>It seems to me that neurotransmitter issues (dopamine, glutamate, seratonin) are implicated in a wide variety of brain disorders and that controlling these (by increases or decreases) via medications seems to help with these problems if the right dosages can be found.</p>
<p>I agree the posters here are successful, I would even go out on a limb and say anybody with ADHD or even a family history of ADHD , who finds himself on college confidential, represents a very small subpopulation of those who meet stringent criteria for that diagnosis. I absolutely believe heredity plays a roll, and I have seen family histories of people with ADHD that would make an atheist drop to their knees and thank God. My practice is made up of a significant number of folks with the “ADHD” phenotype, who are not successful in spite of treatment with stimulants. I’m not sure why I am even sharing all this. So yeah, benefits outweigh risks , but there is much to be learned.</p>
<p>Tmdel; You have Phd in neuroscience; what do you make of the studies?</p>
<p>[Genotype-phenotype</a> distinction - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genotype-phenotype_distinction]Genotype-phenotype”>Genotype–phenotype distinction - Wikipedia)</p>
<p>tmdel: Some colleges are looking for this type of student; some will stay away, just like many other traits.</p>
<p>Brown has a history of liking neurochallenged students. One of my friends is a student advocate by profession and she has experience with this. Dartmouth, I venture, would not be so happy.</p>
<p>Believe in your son and in his potential and the right college with the right solution will appear. I know it’s hard to believe this now, but I really do believe this.</p>
<p>Re Shrinkrap: Yes, both my H and S have ADD. My husband was completely undiagnosed until his forties and my son was diagnosed at 9 or 10, and I believe he will achieve success.</p>
<p>My H chose something to do that exacerbates his condition; my S won’t.</p>
<p>We did not reveal his condition to colleges because counselors advised us not to since he had a solid record, excellent grades and board scores and no red flags at all. But he took medication for many years.</p>
<p>I absolutely think this is not an unfair advantage (convoluted sentence I know) because the same effects could not be had by someone who does not have ADD.</p>
<p>And DS does make sacrifices, too. The medication reduces his creativity, which he doesn’t like, and I don’t either, so it is not a perfect solution. However, I have a child who can do his work and his self-regulating. He also feels pretty good about himself. What more could I want?</p>
<p>For those who have said that they have family members taking medications for ADHD who do not like being on the meds, because they do not feel like themselves or they feel that their creativity is sapped: there are alternative, non-drug approaches to dealing with ADHD issues. </p>
<p>I am not going to say more in this thread because I don’t want it to turn into a meds vs. natural approaches debate. Each person needs to decide on their own what they want to do, and the success of teenagers and adults with drug-free approaches is probably going to depend very largely on individual motivation level. (In other words, you have to work at the other approaches)</p>
<p>Very briefly, just so my post makes some sense, I am talking about things like dietary changes, neurofeedback & other forms of mental training, cognitive-behavioral therapy, etc. </p>
<p>If anyone wants more info then please PM me – I will be glad to tell you what worked for our family. </p>
<p>Again – I don’t want to be in the position of debating pros & cons. What worked for us might not work for others, but I feel sad to read posts from people who are dissatisfied with meds but feel the meds are necessary – so the point is, if you are dissatisfied & looking for an alternative, then there are avenues to pursue.</p>
<p>ITA, but on the other hand- if you have spent years trying to get alternative methods to work/ be enough and you still need help, do not feel like you can’t try " the hard stuff". ( Adderall xr & you should still be getting yourself the nutritional support)
That has been the only thing that has worked for me and my daughter is now trying it, it will be a little sad if it works for her the last month of high school when she has struggled all her life, but she still has college.</p>
<p>What is ITA?</p>
<p>I totally agree ;)</p>
<p>Ah! New one ( for me!).</p>
<p>My kids don’t disclose their ADD to their friends. Thanks to the other posters who had mentioned using lockboxes at college; I thought I was a bit paranoid to consider it, but I think we may go that route.</p>
<p>One of my kids takes Adderall and Concerta (both in very low doses; for him the combo is very effective) and came to the personal realization that he truly needed them about three years ago. He feels he has better control of himself socially and can be more creative. (I know this runs contra to what others have reported.) S says that he can focus instead of having all these competing ideas and thoughts running through his brain at light speed. </p>
<p>We have other family members with ADHD who have not gone the medication or accommodation route and it has been a tough, tough road, both personally and academically. Both are very bright young men with the potential to be productive and happy people, but the ADHD is a huge hurdle standing in the way to those goals.</p>
<p>We discussed with the school GC whether to disclose the ADD to colleges, and the GC said that since S had no accommodations and had an excellent academic record, there was no reason to raise the flag. (The college app discussion discussion was the first time the GC was even aware of S’s ADD.) I will note that the schools to which he applied tend to like quirky people, so I think there was some self-selection on his part up-front, too. :)</p>
<p>We were always very careful not to value-label the medications. Our ped also reinforces this by telling them that the stimulants won’t make you smart or well-behaved, but that they give you the ability to focus and control so that you can manage these behaviors internally.</p>
<p>P3T, thanks for your post. You are always such a shining ray of sanity when it comes to difficult and controversial issues.</p>
<p>He feels he has better control of himself socially and can be more creative. (I know this runs contra to what others have reported.) </p>
<p>Just to clarify; I have had young teens report they control themselves better socially on medicine ( not their words…I won;t report their words…), their major reason for taking it. OTH, my own son has been known to say " I can’t have any fun". Somehow I think these things are related.</p>
<p>1of42 is absolutely correct that stimulant medications used to tread ADHD are potentially addictive. This is a major reason why they are legally classified as a controlled substance, and why a parent must shlep over to the pediatrician’s office every month to get the prescription (refills are not allowed).</p>
<p>Chemically, stimulants are cousins to meth. They can potentially change the way neurotransmitters function – permanently. However, in the measured and controlled dosages monitored by physicians, there isn’t a cause for concern about permanent brain damage. Taking too much of a stimulant medication could certainly be extremely dangerous. Of course, that is true of many medications prescribed by physicians.</p>
<p>Any potential side effects of stimulant medications are best described by a physician. Overall, the benefit to people who suffer from ADHD far outweighs the potential risks. Most risks, such as growth delay and vascular damage, can be lessoned by physician monitoring. Every medication has potential side effects. </p>
<p>We also know that NOT treating ADHD can have serious social, psychological, emotional, academic, and even legal consequences. I’m all for trying natural cures – the Feingold diet, supplements, etc. However, if those things do not work, and the child is suffering, to deny them medication seems wrong. People with ADHD do best, BTW, with both medication and counseling, in order to learn an effective lifestyle approach.</p>
<p>This class of medications, and Ritalin in particular, is arguably the most researched in history. The medical profession has decades-long experience using this drug to treat the disability. There isn’t as much experience with newer medications such as Adderall, but in general this class of medications is very safe when prescribed and monitored by a physician.</p>
<p>It is true that stimulant drugs are sometimes used recreationally, although there are much better highs out there. It is also correct that these medications are being used as a study aid by students who do not have ADHD. I have no idea how much this happens, but I have heard of it many times. In any case, the population most susceptible to extreme abuse is those who suffer from the disease of addiction. Lacking “brakes”, they are most inclined to take a dangerous amount. Since many people do not discover that they have an addictive brain until they get to college or grad school, the presence of stimulant medications being used as a study aid could be particularly hazardous for them.</p>
<p>I certainly agree that you should not be taking a medicine that is not prescribed for you
[People</a> without attention problems in the first place are the ones more likely to develop a dependency on the drug](<a href=“University Life – University of Pennsylvania”>University Life – University of Pennsylvania)</p>
<p>MYTHMOM: I have sat in on many meetings with psychiatrists who not only have a specialty in the field of addiction, but also years of experience working in it. It is absolutely true that stimulant medications are chemically close to meth, and they are definitely potentially addictive.</p>
<p>Trust me, 1of42 is right on this one. It is with much regret that I must back up my friend from Princeton, as he and I have debated a number of times on the subject of drugs (of course, I have always won single-handedly). :)</p>
<p>spideygirl-
As has been said above, while no one is debating the chemical makeup of the psychostimulants, it is not common for a person who is taking a prescribed medication appropriately to develop an “addiction” to it. It is usually a person taking the medicine illegally that has an issue with dependence, and/or abuses the medication. Some people with addictive proclivities may try to feign symptoms to acquire a prescription, but if a person has been accurately and appropriately diagnosed with ADHD, it is, in my 27 yrs of experience in the field, quite rare to see someone having become either psychologically or physiologically addicted to their prescribed psychostim.</p>