Talking about “overdiagnosis” in a vacuum without talking about the devastating costs of underdiagnosis is horrible practice, (especially given how much ADHD is underdiagnosed in women). Please read the “The Impact of ADHD During Adulthood” section in that article. I’ll wait for you.
Self-medication with effective medication isn’t even really possible because amphetamines aren’t over-the-counter, so diagnosis is kinda a necessary condition to get access to effective meds.
The whole “overdiagnosis” meme leads to parents not being OK with the idea of their children being diagnosed with ADHD or *shudder* be on effective medication like adderall or ritalin, or people thinking/internalizing the idea that they can’t ~*~really~*~ have ADHD and that they’re just “lazy” or “flaky” or “apathetic” or whatever other shitty terms are used for people with executive dysfunction.
It also makes doctors more suspicious of people seeking treatment (after all, if it’s overdiagnosed it must be rare, so some of the people I see as a doctor have to be be faking it!), which actually causes harm to people who need access to medical care (finding a doctor who’s ok prescribing can fucking suck when you’re ADHD and have run out of meds).
I’m super critical of psychiatry, and there definitely are people who are diagnosed with it who don’t have it / don’t benefit from medication, but the “overdiagnosis” moral panic causes real harm to people who actually end up needing medical access (often to controlled substances which are impossible to legally get without the appropriate diagnosis).
Possibly because the article does wander off quite quickly into the “does this really exist?” territory and doesn’t really put the results into perspective. As a person with diagnosed ADHD, I’m very put off by this.
ADHD is a nasty subject, especially as indeed, many of the symptoms can also be caused by stress. This is why medical personnel should rule out stress causes carefully. I was in therapy for 1,5 years before diagnosis. Also, ADHD is constantly reevaluated, as the name changes indicate: it used to be that ADS, and ADHS were different things, then it was AD(H)S now they are subforms of the the same thing. So it’s definitely something hard to grasp. Mind that the criteria for ADHS are more then just “is easily distracted” (the better tl;dr is: “cannot steer their concentration properly”)
The over-diagnosis of children is known and nothing new. It is also known that ADHD can go away after puberty and that symptoms change with age. Still, there’s 2 questions:
1) is the misdiagnosis harmful? (whether it must be treated with medication is something entirely different)
2) how harmful is non-diagnosis to the cohort that are correctly diagnosed.
All in all, that means the article is poor in gained knowledge at best.
Anecdotally I was diagnosed young, my family history made medicating unwise and it has not been an easy journey. Daily meditation, being careful about sleep, food, and whatever else I can think of to just try to help mitigate it, and I still have blowout days. I was desperately hoping that it would go away with age but it just never did, I got better at handling it but it never went away. For a period I was self-medicating with caffeine, 8 cups a day just to keep my job, I’ve learned that meditation, adequate sleep, and lifestyle choices to reduce stress is much more effective. Currently down to 2 cups a day. Even if I whipped myself every time I got off task it wouldn’t help, I just take into account that sometimes I have to work late to make up for what I was supposed to do in my work day.
I now practice Kyudo, which has been extremely helpful, as the sport keeps distraction-freedom above all. I am currently trying medication, but I assume I will never go full on it.
Working with my own behavioral patterns definitely helps a lot.
Let’s look at history for the answer. Was it harmful to keep generations of women on Valium?
Maybe quote in full and see that I addressed medication and its usefulness. Medication for ADHD is by the way only intended to support behavioral therapy, if needed.
Also, a counterexample is not an argument.
2) how harmful is non-diagnosis to the cohort that are correctly diagnosed.
Just look at Europe where the ADHD trend never caught up.
I am European. How do you assert otherwise?
Most people that I know that are late-diagnosed over here would like to have a few years of their lifes back. The huge media attack on ADHD diagnosis in the 90s is seen as a huge damage by many.
Assuming the title was true (I think it’s much more nuanced than that), why are some children immature and others not? Is there any way to fix the immaturity, therapy and counseling perhaps? The solution isn’t to blame and wash our hands, but to integrate these people into society, and rehabilitate the nonproductive and antisocial behaviors. People are either an asset or a liability depending on how you treat them.
Talking about “overdiagnosis” in a vacuum without talking about the devastating costs of underdiagnosis is horrible practice, (especially given how much ADHD is underdiagnosed in women). Please read the “The Impact of ADHD During Adulthood” section in that article. I’ll wait for you.
Self-medication with effective medication isn’t even really possible because amphetamines aren’t over-the-counter, so diagnosis is kinda a necessary condition to get access to effective meds.
The whole “overdiagnosis” meme leads to parents not being OK with the idea of their children being diagnosed with ADHD or *shudder* be on effective medication like adderall or ritalin, or people thinking/internalizing the idea that they can’t ~*~really~*~ have ADHD and that they’re just “lazy” or “flaky” or “apathetic” or whatever other shitty terms are used for people with executive dysfunction.
It also makes doctors more suspicious of people seeking treatment (after all, if it’s overdiagnosed it must be rare, so some of the people I see as a doctor have to be be faking it!), which actually causes harm to people who need access to medical care (finding a doctor who’s ok prescribing can fucking suck when you’re ADHD and have run out of meds).
I’m super critical of psychiatry, and there definitely are people who are diagnosed with it who don’t have it / don’t benefit from medication, but the “overdiagnosis” moral panic causes real harm to people who actually end up needing medical access (often to controlled substances which are impossible to legally get without the appropriate diagnosis).
Curious - why the downvotes?
Possibly because the article does wander off quite quickly into the “does this really exist?” territory and doesn’t really put the results into perspective. As a person with diagnosed ADHD, I’m very put off by this.
ADHD is a nasty subject, especially as indeed, many of the symptoms can also be caused by stress. This is why medical personnel should rule out stress causes carefully. I was in therapy for 1,5 years before diagnosis. Also, ADHD is constantly reevaluated, as the name changes indicate: it used to be that ADS, and ADHS were different things, then it was AD(H)S now they are subforms of the the same thing. So it’s definitely something hard to grasp. Mind that the criteria for ADHS are more then just “is easily distracted” (the better tl;dr is: “cannot steer their concentration properly”)
The over-diagnosis of children is known and nothing new. It is also known that ADHD can go away after puberty and that symptoms change with age. Still, there’s 2 questions:
1) is the misdiagnosis harmful? (whether it must be treated with medication is something entirely different)
2) how harmful is non-diagnosis to the cohort that are correctly diagnosed.
All in all, that means the article is poor in gained knowledge at best.
Anecdotally I was diagnosed young, my family history made medicating unwise and it has not been an easy journey. Daily meditation, being careful about sleep, food, and whatever else I can think of to just try to help mitigate it, and I still have blowout days. I was desperately hoping that it would go away with age but it just never did, I got better at handling it but it never went away. For a period I was self-medicating with caffeine, 8 cups a day just to keep my job, I’ve learned that meditation, adequate sleep, and lifestyle choices to reduce stress is much more effective. Currently down to 2 cups a day. Even if I whipped myself every time I got off task it wouldn’t help, I just take into account that sometimes I have to work late to make up for what I was supposed to do in my work day.
I now practice Kyudo, which has been extremely helpful, as the sport keeps distraction-freedom above all. I am currently trying medication, but I assume I will never go full on it.
Working with my own behavioral patterns definitely helps a lot.
Let’s look at history for the answer. Was it harmful to keep generations of women on Valium?
Just look at Europe where the ADHD trend never caught up.
Maybe quote in full and see that I addressed medication and its usefulness. Medication for ADHD is by the way only intended to support behavioral therapy, if needed.
Also, a counterexample is not an argument.
I am European. How do you assert otherwise?
Most people that I know that are late-diagnosed over here would like to have a few years of their lifes back. The huge media attack on ADHD diagnosis in the 90s is seen as a huge damage by many.
Assuming the title was true (I think it’s much more nuanced than that), why are some children immature and others not? Is there any way to fix the immaturity, therapy and counseling perhaps? The solution isn’t to blame and wash our hands, but to integrate these people into society, and rehabilitate the nonproductive and antisocial behaviors. People are either an asset or a liability depending on how you treat them.
It’s referring to children in the same school year, which may be up to 9 or 10 months different in age, i.e. maturity
Well, if scientists say so…
[Comment removed by author]
Are you sure? How could you tell?
I think he’s confused about visible hyperactivity being a requirement for the disorder (it’s not).
I’m pretty stupid sometimes, forgive me.