Yes you have. You've just never met a person diagnosed with ADHD. Even in the US, the diagnosis rate of ADHD is way below the statistical rate of occurrence in the population (and yes, that is true even when you only say something is "ADHD" if it is critically impairing the person's life.) But in other countries, diagnosis is virtually nonexistent, despite similar prevalence. In those countries, people with ADHD are just seen as lazy or lacking character, and are told to "suck it up." (Where ADHD is precisely the lack of executive function necessary to "suck it up.") These people do not turn out well.
If you look at most countries besides the US, there is a distinct "slacker" subculture that is likely a bunch of people with undiagnosed ADHD. NEETs in Japan, for example. These are approached as unique cultural phenomena, rather than through the lens of epidemiology.
(Other thought: maybe you have met someone diagnosed with ADHD, but they've never told you they have it. I don't go around telling my friends and coworkers I have ADHD; it's an annoying conversation to have with someone if you don't know whether they know enough about the disease to separate it from "laziness" as a temporary emotion. I just blab about it to strangers on the internet.)
There are a number of theories, none of which have very strong support.
You probably have met someone with ADHD, you just probably judged them as lazy or immature. Some people very much do struggle with keeping certain topics on their minds.
Probably because they seem normal to you. I have found that if you were to compartmentalize behaviors independent of the person or other behaviors, you are far less likely to give it a name, never mind categorizing it as an illness.
<rant>
If people have ADHD and it needs to be "prescribed" a drug or treatment, then there are so many different habits and behaviors that can just as well be labeled as an illness.
Schools have used ADHD diagnosis to explain disruptive students. The truth of the matter was that those students turned out to be a little more difficult to handle simply because they demanded more of the teacher and were not content with either the style of information or the amount of info they were getting.
Which brings me back to the article: games exhaust mentally hyped minds. And that is supposed to be a "cure", just like physical activity is supposed to be a "cure" to restless bodies. </rant>
It's an emotional topic because it involves giving amphetamines to children. Either you don't believe in ADHD and thus think kids are being prescribed/forced to take hard drugs for no reason other than a cultural and educational flaw.
Or you do believe in it and want to justify why giving amphetamines to children is a good thing. Maybe you take them yourself.
Either way, it's emotional because people are heavily invested in their choice since the opposing side will basically view them as monsters.
What if? Why, it would be akin to a social revolution. There would be literally millions of people who would not only have to deal with the original symptoms, but also the side-effects of withdrawal from a pharmaceutical addiction.
It can't happen, at least not overnight. It is going to take at least 2 or 3 generations before the dependency on industrialized-pharmaceuticals can be removed as an aspect of our western societies. Even if we have a solution to the dependency that pharmaceutical customers have, it is no small thing to come off the prescription.
So how far have we come as a species that we are having these 'generational approach' questions posed to us? Last centurys' Ritalin addict is this years flapper girl. All we do as cultures is propel the change of fashion forward. I feel nothing but pity for those who have a chemical dependence where the next patient bears no such duress, should they push pixels instead of pills. I would love to see it all change, such that none of us are dependent on industrialized pharmaceutical production - the penultimate of capital masters, but the closest analog to a solution in this regard, that I see, is the legalization of weed.
Legalize it, and a lot of these industrial problems have the potential to disappear...
bayesianhorse|10 years ago
Red_Tarsius|10 years ago
derefr|10 years ago
If you look at most countries besides the US, there is a distinct "slacker" subculture that is likely a bunch of people with undiagnosed ADHD. NEETs in Japan, for example. These are approached as unique cultural phenomena, rather than through the lens of epidemiology.
(Other thought: maybe you have met someone diagnosed with ADHD, but they've never told you they have it. I don't go around telling my friends and coworkers I have ADHD; it's an annoying conversation to have with someone if you don't know whether they know enough about the disease to separate it from "laziness" as a temporary emotion. I just blab about it to strangers on the internet.)
duaneb|10 years ago
You probably have met someone with ADHD, you just probably judged them as lazy or immature. Some people very much do struggle with keeping certain topics on their minds.
nashashmi|10 years ago
<rant> If people have ADHD and it needs to be "prescribed" a drug or treatment, then there are so many different habits and behaviors that can just as well be labeled as an illness.
Schools have used ADHD diagnosis to explain disruptive students. The truth of the matter was that those students turned out to be a little more difficult to handle simply because they demanded more of the teacher and were not content with either the style of information or the amount of info they were getting.
Which brings me back to the article: games exhaust mentally hyped minds. And that is supposed to be a "cure", just like physical activity is supposed to be a "cure" to restless bodies. </rant>
madez|10 years ago
Why do so many react so strongly emotionally to this topic? Or does my impression misguide me?
malvosenior|10 years ago
Or you do believe in it and want to justify why giving amphetamines to children is a good thing. Maybe you take them yourself.
Either way, it's emotional because people are heavily invested in their choice since the opposing side will basically view them as monsters.
unknown|10 years ago
[deleted]
madez|10 years ago
I did not know that vaccines sometimes contain a mercury-compound. Mercury is highly toxic. I'm mildly surprised.
fit2rule|10 years ago
It can't happen, at least not overnight. It is going to take at least 2 or 3 generations before the dependency on industrialized-pharmaceuticals can be removed as an aspect of our western societies. Even if we have a solution to the dependency that pharmaceutical customers have, it is no small thing to come off the prescription.
So how far have we come as a species that we are having these 'generational approach' questions posed to us? Last centurys' Ritalin addict is this years flapper girl. All we do as cultures is propel the change of fashion forward. I feel nothing but pity for those who have a chemical dependence where the next patient bears no such duress, should they push pixels instead of pills. I would love to see it all change, such that none of us are dependent on industrialized pharmaceutical production - the penultimate of capital masters, but the closest analog to a solution in this regard, that I see, is the legalization of weed.
Legalize it, and a lot of these industrial problems have the potential to disappear...
swombat|10 years ago
Very US-centric. We don't prescribe amphetamines like candy in Europe.
unimpressive|10 years ago
Pharmaceuticals aren't the devil and god your writing style is off the charts pretentious.