this post was submitted on 27 Jun 2024
785 points (98.4% liked)
ADHD Women
1873 readers
1 users here now
A community for women to find support and discuss living with ADHD.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I’m a therapist. In grad school, one of my professors said that the most reliable way to diagnose someone with ADHD is to give them a stimulant and see how they react. Understandably, that’s not how people are diagnosed for safety and ethical reasons… but it is effective.
A more ethical approach then: put the person in a room together with an adhd'er and see how quickly they bond. Seriously, it's like there's a hidden kinship, shit just works.
So much this. When we speak the same language, it won’t take long to become best friends!
That doesn't sound all that dangerous to me. I don't really understand what the ethical issues here are.
For people who do not have ADHD, the medication used to treat ADHD can be extremely addictive.
If you can get addicted to something from trying it just once, there is something already wrong with you at that point. This sounds like a misunderstanding of how addiction works.
... There are lots of people like that and it's mostly genetic so I'm unsure if you're agreeing or not with this standpoint... Because that's a big fucking ethical issue lol.
You're going to need some serious evidence for that one. Most people become addicts because they have something to run from like mental health issues or bad life circumstances. You can have a genetic susceptibility to addiction, but that would probably require you take it more than once unless another issue is in play.
Edit: in fact even then getting addicted to amphetamines on one try, from the relatively low doses doctors give for ADHD is very unlikely.
This is also the most DARE shit I have ever seen. People are very unlikely to become addicted to amphetamines from one low dose given by a doctor, not matter what their genetics might be. Genetics are only one small piece of the addiction puzzle, and alcohol is probably more addictive anyway.
The thing is that with ADD/ADHD specifically, we don't have a reaction to low doses. My Adderall prescription is 40mg twice daily. That much Adderall would absolutely be enough to get someone without ADHD addicted, if they have the predisposition to get addicted to amphetamines.
All of the evidence is against this idea. Stop spreading misinformation. https://www.vice.com/en/article/exqm9j/reasons-why-you-cant-get-addicted-to-drugs-after-one-hit
I think both of y'all have a rough understanding of addiction. There is no such thing as people who get addicted to substances after a single use. There are instances of people trying a drug and then continuing to use it, usually due to availability.
Its a lot like any other opportunity that enters your life. Sometimes its really hard to turn down the idea of using to fix whatever problems you have in the short term. Noone plans to use forever you know.
Is it so shocking that average people are just as capable of addiction as the people they see at their local methadone clinic?
You are right that taking something once at a low dose is unlikely to make you addicted. It doesn't make sense though to ignore psychological, situational, and genetic risk factors for addiction.
I never said that those factors should be ignored.
The point I'm making is that when people frame this as "some people just aren't built to handle it" they put people into two groups: the easily addicted, and normal people.
People want to be part of and prove they are in the normal group. Something is wrong with you if you are in the addict group. Those in the normal group feel protected by being part of it. They think they aren't capable of addiction that they must have gotten lucky.
I think that's an incredibly dangerous framing of addiction. Everyone is capable of becoming an addict. Just because some never do, doesn't mean they had some special mutation that protected them. Addiction is an incredibly social disease, and with how little we know about it we should be more cautious rather than callous when discussing it.
What makes you think I am doing that? All I was trying to say is that something serious must be happening for someone to get addicted from trying low dose amphetamine once. Suggesting that's a common outcome is the most DARE shit I have ever fucking seen.
You're aiming this at the wrong person. I am not the one suggesting here that addiction is purely down to genetics. Addiction comes down to a lot of different situational and psychological risk factors. Poverty being a big one, as well as stress, depression, anxiety, and so on. You don't need any genetic predisposition to become an addict, I agree with you there.
And how would you say "most reliable" is figured? Is it like a 15% success rate and the next best test is 13%?
Is this more of a gut feeling thing or is there some sort of data to back up the claim?