Re: [RANT] Giving Mind Control Drugs to Children
Tim writes more about Ritalin:
From what I've read--and I'm no expert, having long had essentially the _opposite_ of "attention deficit disorder," assuming it really even exists!--most children getting Ritalin are just being sedated. Behavior control in its purest form. While the kids stop their wandering attention and constant physical motions, it's because they're in a mental fog, just one step away from drooling. (The 8-year-old friend of my friend's son is so zoned out he can't play video games well at all...until the drugs wear off.)
That's very interesting, especially the part about video games. It sounds like overdosing to me. My wife says that a Ritalin overdose can also affect your heart rate and ability to sleep. Regarding video games, we went through some elaborate assessment process before Alex ended up on Ritalin. The school people did an assessment declaring he wasn't "learning disabled" but may have ADHD. Then he saw a behavioral psychologist for a few hours of observation, yielding the diagnosis. Lastly a different psychologist measured his behavior using some computer based game/test. The actual dosage was calibrated according to his effectiveness on the game/test, which involved memory, coordination, and ability to concentrate on something fundamentally boring. The test was performed 3 times to compare his performance before and after dosage. The point of all this is that there are other ways of using Ritalin. I don't think I'd tolerate its use on Alex if I didn't trust my wife. She has a much better background in such things than I, as well as a family doctor's experience with seeing the results of drug abuse.
BarelyObCrypto: ADD is more about lack of attention *control* than lack of attention itself. Hyperfocus is also a trait of ADHD, and computers tend to cause hyperfocus for a lot of ADDers.
BTW, I saw a comment that Bill Gates is almost certainly an ADD person...or maybe the comment was that he is borderline autistic?
This matches my own experiences with ADHD. That's the thing about the raw phenomenon and its overall lifestyle effect: you either find your niche and do OK, or you get sidelined. Rick.
William Knowles <erehwon@c2.org> writes:
I have a problem with people like Mike Duvos who think that folks like myself and others on this list with ADD use having ADD as a crutch for being fidgety, not getting their work done on time, or worst yet, Fired.
Welcome to ADD-Punks folks.
I wish people like Mr. Duvos could walk a mile in my shoes before making off the cuff remarks, I wish I could get jobs done on time, I wish that I could finish one project before starting three more! My office looks like someone tossed a hand grenade in it, Proposals to the left, Job quotes to the right, jobs is various states of completion, Lost jobs to my inattentivness to my clients, Lost good clients because of having ADD and not knowing it!
Sounds like my office. Of course, I usually force myself to get things done on time, and to be polite to the clients, but the hand grenade description is perfectly accurate.
One of my wishes did come true, and that was finding out that I do have ADD.
This is really a telling statement, isn't it? After all, we rarely hear people saying their greatest wish is to find out that they have liver disease, or cancer, or heart trouble. The problem here is that we live in a society that won't cut any slack for normal human diversity unless you have some sort of official disease defined by the medical profession. So there is constant pressure to "medicalize" all sorts of odd things, so that the people who exhibit certain characteristics don't get lumped in with the rest of the supposedly unproductive malcontents. When you get to the point where, all other things being equal, a diagnosis makes your life bearable again, it is time to make some serious changes in your environment.
Below is a list of famous people with Attention Deficit Disorders and/or Learning Disorders, and I'd be willing to bet that Perry Metzger either has, or knows someone with ADD.
[snip]
One can only wonder how much more great some of the people on this list would be today if they knew ADD back then.
"Albert, you're doing very well on your Ritalin. Your attendance has been perfect since you started taking it, and you've finished every task we've given you on time. I think you're ready to be promoted to SENIOR clerk-typist, with a $1 an hour raise in pay. "Keep taking the medication your doctor prescribes, and you won't have any more problems dreaming all day about non positive definite 4-manifolds and null geodesics." Right. :) -- Mike Duvos $ PGP 2.6 Public Key available $ mpd@netcom.com $ via Finger. $
Mike Duvos writes:
One of my wishes did come true, and that was finding out that I do have ADD.
This is really a telling statement, isn't it? After all, we rarely hear people saying their greatest wish is to find out that they have liver disease, or cancer, or heart trouble.
A total distortion of the man's point. Imagine someone suffering from an unknown ailment for years. One day, he is finally diagnosed, a treatment is given, and he feels better. All you can do is try to argue that he shouldn't be treated.
The problem here is that we live in a society that won't cut any slack for normal human diversity unless you have some sort of official disease defined by the medical profession.
Did you listen to that guy at all? He was in pain and anguish over the fact that his life was totally screwed up in spite of his best efforts to make a go at work he loved. Now he can function. You want him to be "diverse" and go on not functioning. He doesn't want that. Who are you to tell him how live his own life? Perry
"Perry E. Metzger" <perry@piermont.com>
A total distortion of the man's point. Imagine someone suffering from an unknown ailment for years. One day, he is finally diagnosed, a treatment is given, and he feels better.
All you can do is try to argue that he shouldn't be treated.
I think the problem here is in making the "diagnosis" the all-singing all-dancing point around which everything else revolves. If we have safe and effective medications which increase alertness in the school and in the workplace, why shouldn't everyone be able to take them in small doses as the need arises? We only need to invent a "syndrome" or a "disorder" around such things because we make such an enormous distinction between "medicines", which are good, and "drugs", which are bad. Inventing mythological ailments and "politicizing dissent" has other disadvantages as well. Little Johnny's perfectly valid criticisms of the local NEA stormtrooper can be easily dismissed by an explanation that Johnny has "Authority Defiance Disorder", or some other convenient thing that permits Johnny to be tranked senseless whenever he might say something awkward in public. This has close ties to the way those in authority, and their minions, regularly diagnose people like us with labels like "anti-government" as in "The anti-Government Freemen", "The anti-Government Militias", or "The anti-Government Crypto-Anarchists."
Did you listen to that guy at all? He was in pain and anguish over the fact that his life was totally screwed up in spite of his best efforts to make a go at work he loved. Now he can function. You want him to be "diverse" and go on not functioning. He doesn't want that. Who are you to tell him how live his own life?
The human body is a homeostatic system. Let's see what this guy's mood looks like in 30 years and see how he feels about Ritalin taking then. By that time, he may be taking the same dose he is today just to feel as rotten as he did before he started taking it at all. Not uncommon at all in the "drugs help me function" crowd. -- Mike Duvos $ PGP 2.6 Public Key available $ mpd@netcom.com $ via Finger. $
Mike Duvos writes:
Inventing mythological ailments and "politicizing dissent" has other disadvantages as well. Little Johnny's perfectly valid criticisms of the local NEA stormtrooper can be easily dismissed by an explanation that Johnny has "Authority Defiance Disorder", or some other convenient thing that permits Johnny to be tranked senseless whenever he might say something awkward in public.
The abuse of psychiatry as an instrument of opression is not new, of course. The Soviet Union used it regularly. However, if anything, Ritalin gives a person with ADD the tools with which to more effectively subvert authority. Its very hard to smash the state, or even plot to get even with your boss, when you can't concentrate sufficiently to execute your plans. It may be true that someone will be less likely to impulsively act out against authority under its influence, but such impulses rarely actually produce any sort of lasting impact -- they only get one in trouble. By contrast, effective subversion requires patience and self discipline, which is precisely what an ADD sufferer does not have. In short, if one really was trying to narcotize a troublemaker, tranquilizers and the like are probably far better than Ritalin and other amphetamines, which, in spite of Tim's pronouncements, do not act as tranquilizers.
Did you listen to that guy at all? He was in pain and anguish over the fact that his life was totally screwed up in spite of his best efforts to make a go at work he loved. Now he can function. You want him to be "diverse" and go on not functioning. He doesn't want that. Who are you to tell him how live his own life?
The human body is a homeostatic system. Let's see what this guy's mood looks like in 30 years and see how he feels about Ritalin taking then. By that time, he may be taking the same dose he is today just to feel as rotten as he did before he started taking it at all.
Actually, some ADD sufferers actually need less medication with time, as the ability to concentrate for prolonged periods gives them the chance to work on non-drug based coping strategies which are difficult to work on without the meds. Perhaps you ought to examine the scientific literature rather than simply deciding to guess. Perry
participants (3)
-
mpd＠netcom.com -
Perry E. Metzger -
Rick Smith