I'm always curious when research like this comes out, as it flies in the face of my (admittedly anecdotal) evidence. I myself am diagnosed with ADHD-PI (Primarily Inattentive). I've also been part of a few hacker groups over the years, and they had/have the best and brightest minds I have ever witnessed. They have an uncanny intuition and ability to traverse complex problem spaces, much faster than most people. There is also an unusually high concentration of people with ADHD in these groups (along with some other mental 'inflictions'). My best guess is anywhere from 20-30% of them have ADHD to some degree, sample size is about 30.
Most of these people do fairly well in life. Their skills are extremely valuable and prized. They also almost always (95-99%) did not do very well in school. There are a couple of explanations:
1. Studies like these simply track educational achievements, which do not necessarily correlate with success in life.
2. I only ever see/meet the success stories, each of which there is a much larger amount of failures for.
3. There are multiple conditions that are all erroneously grouped under the moniker of ADHD. Most, if not all, of the successful ADHD people I know lean more towards the inattentive side of things.
I think for every batch of successful people with ADHD, there are others still finding their way. I have ADD and my brother has ADHD. I'm super quiet, observant, and methodical at times. He's very energetic, passionate, "never give up" kind of personality. It's interesting to see the similarities and differences between us. I'm not sure if it's related to the mental disorder or just hereditary or shared personalities from growing up together, but we both didn't do well in school as our parents would hope. He was definitely a troublemaker and I was just..in my own world I suppose. I'd like to think I'm "successful". I have a steady job and able to pay the bills while affording the thrills of life. I'm extremely grateful. My brother, on the other hand, lives with my parents, working 60 hours a week and has no health benefits or paid time off. Perhaps it's part of "growing up" and I just got lucky. I'd like to think that him and I look at the world from a different lens from others but I don't think it's affording us any sort of life hacks that make us successful or brilliant.
Same here, speaking as a fellow ADHD sufferer. Perhaps a part of it is because of how IQ is measured. If memory serves (which it often does not) one of the things IQ tests is short-term working memory, something that ADHD is known to impair. Maybe this is the main culprit. It would be interesting to see the IQ scores broken down into their various categories.
Also, the thing you've observed in your friends is similar to something I've observed in myself (this can be pretty fraught, so big grain of salt). I tend to see patterns or connections between lots of little bits of seemingly unrelated data where others don't. I'm not sure if this is because I'm better at discerning patterns, or if it's because I tend to collect and store all these little odds and ends more than others normally do. It's also possibly a 'involuntarily trained' skill: quite a bit of the time I find myself scrambling to deduce what is going on based on contextual clues, because I'd been daydreaming and all of a sudden I find someone asking me "so what's you opinion?"
Frankly it's more of a curse than anything. I sometimes feel as if I'm pleading with someone to "step off the train tracks" because I can see a train bearing down on them, and they adamantly refuse because they see no such thing.
This gets my vote. I've met brilliant ADHD hacker-types, overall average normal folks, and drop-out homeless people. They all did poorly in school but the rest seems up in the air.
I suspect there are several comorbid complementary/incompatible genetic mutations, which lead to above-average or below-average mental faculties, and a nurture component of learning how to effectively manage the condition. We're probably observing evolution in action here.
> [quoting gilles deleuze] Many young people strangely boast of being "motivated";
they re-request apprenticeships and permanent training. It's
up to them to discover what they're being made to serve, just
as their elders discovered, not without difficulty, the telos of
the disciplines.
>What must be discovered is a way out of the motivation/
demotivation binary, so that disidentification from the control
program registers as something other than dejected apathy. One
strategy would be to shift the political terrain - to move away
from the unions' traditional focus on pay and onto forms of
discontent specific to post-Fordism. Before we analyse that
further, we must consider in more depth what post-Fordism
actually is."
I was once diagnosed with ADHD myself as a child. I have been unmedicated for 8 years now and been quite successful career wise, and academically. Though I do wonder if I could do better had I not had ADHD.
its not fair to conduct these studies solely on educational outcomes because educational outcomes in the west largely depend on how well you conform to the mean societal expectation of a successful archetype. many people have unique educational styles (ADHDers included). I myself personally learned more from the internet and reading books than I ever did in school.
I suspect successful engineers, start up CEOs, hacker types have higher prevalences of "learning disorders", ADHD, etc. Many did poorly in school, though many also excelled. I also suspect the same demographics are true of musicians and other artists.
The MAJOR caveat here, is that while these groups probably have higher prevalences, and these fields are more or less supportive of people with these issues, very few ADHDers can break into these fields and the average ADHDer probably will perform worse in life than the average person without.
Mostly conjecture, based on my own anecdotal evidence, but worth consideration.
In the UK/IE system GCSEs morphed between 1990 and 2010 with exams replaced by coursework - which is quicksand for ADHD types. This is a coursework cohort from 2007-2008.
Now and before 1990, GCSEs at 16yo are memory tests in an exam hall almost designed for hyperfocus. It is relatively easier for a ADHDer to "wing it".
What would be more interesting, is to see how many fell down on mainly course-work assessment versus mainly exam assessment. Also, comparison between 16yo GCSE results and 18yo A level results.
Assuming you're not trolling, it's impressive that you're 10 and on HN. I think modern culture, in a bad way, encourages people to take their inclinations to the extreme. If you have ADHD, you're not just someone with that particular medical condition, you're "an impatient genius who has no tolerance for BS or stupidity." That's not to say you think of yourself as such, just that people are rewarded for acting consistently with a memefied Hollywood stereotype of themselves. This in turn influences and reinforces behavior.
Focus on how you can utilize your mental makeup to shape your life rather than bend others. Reduction of zero-sum dog eat dog thinking would help ameliorate any social aspect of your anxiety. I didn't have much to go off of from your post but I hope that helps.
Just be aware of how you function and work around it. At 32, things are still stressful, but I manage alot netter and have developed a sense if humor to help cope. Read books! Learn jokes and Ice breakers!
The challenge in the end, I suppose, is to overcome yourself. Being 10, you're only starting, and things will get better, especially mid-twenties, so you've a good road to walk. Step by step :)
Has GWAS become a reliable means of identifying causal variants? How have the methods evolved over the last five years? What are the big success stories?
I work a bit in the field - GWAS is still not identifying causal variants, only linked variants.
There are tons and tons and tons of publications that keep on getting published on running similar datasets with the same methods (PCA, regression or MLM, done) and then reporting the associated SNPs. In humans these papers are getting huge with massive datasets, like this one: http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2015/05/27/019885
There was also this interesting paper which relied on a very specific configuration of a human population, you cannot do that with for example Brits: http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2015/11/12/031518
By its very nature GWAS cannot prove a causal relationship, I'm now hoping that CRISPR-Cas9 can provide for that - use GWAS to find candidate SNPs, use CRISPR to introduce those SNPs in an unaffected population, measure phenotype changes. Of course with sequencing getting so cheap you can start with SNP calling and get a much more comprehensive picture by looking at large scale insertions and deletions by just looking at the whole genome, like this paper for 10,000 (!!!) humans: http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2016/07/01/061663
Conclusions: ADHD diagnosis risk alleles impact on functional outcomes in two generations (mother and child) and likely have intergenerational environmental effects.
So, ADHD is frequently heredity based on certain genes?
Why oh why oh whyyyyyyyy must academics write like this still?? (I know the answer, doesn't stop me from complaining)
Jargon in academia is definitely overused, but in this case the terminology they're using has specific meanings, that this is meant to communicate to people within the field, that are lost or obscured when you attempt to simplify them.
[+] [-] axoltl|9 years ago|reply
Most of these people do fairly well in life. Their skills are extremely valuable and prized. They also almost always (95-99%) did not do very well in school. There are a couple of explanations:
1. Studies like these simply track educational achievements, which do not necessarily correlate with success in life.
2. I only ever see/meet the success stories, each of which there is a much larger amount of failures for.
3. There are multiple conditions that are all erroneously grouped under the moniker of ADHD. Most, if not all, of the successful ADHD people I know lean more towards the inattentive side of things.
4. Some combination of the above theories.
[+] [-] slezakattack|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] spangry|9 years ago|reply
Also, the thing you've observed in your friends is similar to something I've observed in myself (this can be pretty fraught, so big grain of salt). I tend to see patterns or connections between lots of little bits of seemingly unrelated data where others don't. I'm not sure if this is because I'm better at discerning patterns, or if it's because I tend to collect and store all these little odds and ends more than others normally do. It's also possibly a 'involuntarily trained' skill: quite a bit of the time I find myself scrambling to deduce what is going on based on contextual clues, because I'd been daydreaming and all of a sudden I find someone asking me "so what's you opinion?"
Frankly it's more of a curse than anything. I sometimes feel as if I'm pleading with someone to "step off the train tracks" because I can see a train bearing down on them, and they adamantly refuse because they see no such thing.
[+] [-] losteric|9 years ago|reply
This gets my vote. I've met brilliant ADHD hacker-types, overall average normal folks, and drop-out homeless people. They all did poorly in school but the rest seems up in the air.
I suspect there are several comorbid complementary/incompatible genetic mutations, which lead to above-average or below-average mental faculties, and a nurture component of learning how to effectively manage the condition. We're probably observing evolution in action here.
[+] [-] pizza|9 years ago|reply
>What must be discovered is a way out of the motivation/ demotivation binary, so that disidentification from the control program registers as something other than dejected apathy. One strategy would be to shift the political terrain - to move away from the unions' traditional focus on pay and onto forms of discontent specific to post-Fordism. Before we analyse that further, we must consider in more depth what post-Fordism actually is."
Mark Fisher - Capitalist Realism
[+] [-] jbrambleDC|9 years ago|reply
its not fair to conduct these studies solely on educational outcomes because educational outcomes in the west largely depend on how well you conform to the mean societal expectation of a successful archetype. many people have unique educational styles (ADHDers included). I myself personally learned more from the internet and reading books than I ever did in school.
I suspect successful engineers, start up CEOs, hacker types have higher prevalences of "learning disorders", ADHD, etc. Many did poorly in school, though many also excelled. I also suspect the same demographics are true of musicians and other artists.
The MAJOR caveat here, is that while these groups probably have higher prevalences, and these fields are more or less supportive of people with these issues, very few ADHDers can break into these fields and the average ADHDer probably will perform worse in life than the average person without.
Mostly conjecture, based on my own anecdotal evidence, but worth consideration.
[+] [-] safanycom|9 years ago|reply
In the UK/IE system GCSEs morphed between 1990 and 2010 with exams replaced by coursework - which is quicksand for ADHD types. This is a coursework cohort from 2007-2008.
Now and before 1990, GCSEs at 16yo are memory tests in an exam hall almost designed for hyperfocus. It is relatively easier for a ADHDer to "wing it".
What would be more interesting, is to see how many fell down on mainly course-work assessment versus mainly exam assessment. Also, comparison between 16yo GCSE results and 18yo A level results.
[Disclaimer: ADHD PhD who failed A Levels]
[+] [-] dweekly|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] marcoeur5|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] keenmaster|9 years ago|reply
Focus on how you can utilize your mental makeup to shape your life rather than bend others. Reduction of zero-sum dog eat dog thinking would help ameliorate any social aspect of your anxiety. I didn't have much to go off of from your post but I hope that helps.
[+] [-] godmodus|9 years ago|reply
The challenge in the end, I suppose, is to overcome yourself. Being 10, you're only starting, and things will get better, especially mid-twenties, so you've a good road to walk. Step by step :)
[+] [-] AlexCoventry|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] a_bonobo|9 years ago|reply
There are tons and tons and tons of publications that keep on getting published on running similar datasets with the same methods (PCA, regression or MLM, done) and then reporting the associated SNPs. In humans these papers are getting huge with massive datasets, like this one: http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2015/05/27/019885
There was also this interesting paper which relied on a very specific configuration of a human population, you cannot do that with for example Brits: http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2015/11/12/031518
By its very nature GWAS cannot prove a causal relationship, I'm now hoping that CRISPR-Cas9 can provide for that - use GWAS to find candidate SNPs, use CRISPR to introduce those SNPs in an unaffected population, measure phenotype changes. Of course with sequencing getting so cheap you can start with SNP calling and get a much more comprehensive picture by looking at large scale insertions and deletions by just looking at the whole genome, like this paper for 10,000 (!!!) humans: http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2016/07/01/061663
[+] [-] blakesterz|9 years ago|reply
So, ADHD is frequently heredity based on certain genes?
Why oh why oh whyyyyyyyy must academics write like this still?? (I know the answer, doesn't stop me from complaining)
[+] [-] Itaxpica|9 years ago|reply
Jargon in academia is definitely overused, but in this case the terminology they're using has specific meanings, that this is meant to communicate to people within the field, that are lost or obscured when you attempt to simplify them.