The Esquire article was lengthy, but I was finally able to focus enough to read the whole thing, word by word, by reading it during breaks in the championship basket ball game. I have trouble reading anything of length on the computer or i Phone.
The loving positive behavioral approach of the guru was featured. I really liked it. I’m sure this approach is helpful to some; for some may be all that’s needed. Some may need medicine to be able to respond. I’d like to see this approach more widely applied, and some data on the results.
However, the article implies that this is The Answer to ADD ADHD and should always be used instead of meds. Bull.
I agree with some things in the article:
1. There are many things that can help with ADD ADHD. A common error is to think that if something helps, the lack of it must be the cause. Bad logic. Biggest example is the French flap, with people noting that structure helps ADHD, therefore these children suffer not from ADHD at all, merely from a lack of structure. Oh, my!
2. I totally agree that twelve minutes is not long enough to diagnose ADD ADHD, let alone diagnose and prescribe. I suspect this twelve minute idea is just part of the stereotyping exaggerated sensationalizing approach of the article, but I have some fear that it may not be. Has anyone had experience with this?
requires time and attention, with a history, details of current problems, and ideally a review of records, information from another person, and a test.
I have never diagnosed ADHD in less than fifty minutes, and usually longer.
may sometimes help people without ADHD ADD, but I remain doubtful, even though some data supports this. I think that if a trial of the medicine yields significant improvement, that helps support the diagnosis.
I disagree with the misinforming, slanted, biased, sensationalizing approach.
1. The article repeatedly calls the medicines, and specifically ritalin, “highly addictive”. I don’t think so. Some people can become addicted, sometimes with very bad results, but I think it is a very small percent, especially if the diagnosis is correct. Note that many children have “drug holidays”, skip the weekends or even the summer – this is not addiction.
2. The article portrays the medicines as very medically dangerous; again I think not so.
I believe that misleading articles like this do harm.
David Pomeroy MD Private Practice in Diagnosis and Treatment of ADHD
Pieces such as those in Esquire are so transparent. Do a Google search, and you’ll find that egregious title repeated ad infinitum. Sensation sells on the Internet, and nothing sells it better than a “drugged” piece on ADHD.
No matter if it’s poorly researched and cherry-picked, full of fear-mongering hyperbole.
Other links on ritalin:
Weaving a web of misinformation.