First, chill the fuck out. Second, I am not, in anyway, discouraging the use of stimulants for the treatment of ADHD. Let me.make this part VERY clear. ADHD medication can and is often life altering for those affected and should be absolutely considered, under medical supervision. Third, I have read a lot of the studies and I am not disagreeing with the fact that the medication is safe (still urge medical supervision).
If you cool your jets you’d realize that what I am speaking of SPECIFICALLY, is the implication in the original comment that people with ADHD are somehow immune to addiction to stimulants. Assuming immunity to addiction is dangerous and also not true. If you cannot differentiate between the two very different points, feel free to block me.
No one made that argument. The original question was asking if it’s a reliable confirmation of a correct diagnosis of ADHD if stimulant medication doesn’t seem to be addictive for the individual. The further implication was research done to demonstrate the low addiction risk of people with ADHD with stimulant medication. There was no attempt at specified language that would necessitate an implication that they believed people with ADHD are “immune”(in the popular use) to stimulant addiction. Maybe their use of language was inexact, but communication is a two-way street and it’s important to not assume necessity where it isn’t explicitly specified. A response of “No.” to the intent of the original question is irresponsibly incorrect.
Even if their intent was indeed to specifically say people with ADHD are immune to stimulant addiction, while the correct first part of a response would be to say that definitely isn’t the case, it still implies some interaction with the studies showing the direct benefits of stimulant medication for people with ADHD struggling with addiction. Leaving the response at a negative would be factually correct, but still irresponsible to leave out the referred studies because the implication would be that it’s just some random made-up bullshit, increasing stigma, seeding skepticism of the actual studies, and just generally being unhelpful. It’s a topical discussion, so the appropriate thing is to actually address the topic at hand.
Also, starting off your comment with “chill the fuck out” and ending it with “feel free to block me.” is hilarious. I’m sorry, I’m not sure how to phrase that without it seeming like I’m mocking you, I just genuinely find it funny.
First, chill the fuck out. Second, I am not, in anyway, discouraging the use of stimulants for the treatment of ADHD. Let me.make this part VERY clear. ADHD medication can and is often life altering for those affected and should be absolutely considered, under medical supervision. Third, I have read a lot of the studies and I am not disagreeing with the fact that the medication is safe (still urge medical supervision).
If you cool your jets you’d realize that what I am speaking of SPECIFICALLY, is the implication in the original comment that people with ADHD are somehow immune to addiction to stimulants. Assuming immunity to addiction is dangerous and also not true. If you cannot differentiate between the two very different points, feel free to block me.
No one made that argument. The original question was asking if it’s a reliable confirmation of a correct diagnosis of ADHD if stimulant medication doesn’t seem to be addictive for the individual. The further implication was research done to demonstrate the low addiction risk of people with ADHD with stimulant medication. There was no attempt at specified language that would necessitate an implication that they believed people with ADHD are “immune”(in the popular use) to stimulant addiction. Maybe their use of language was inexact, but communication is a two-way street and it’s important to not assume necessity where it isn’t explicitly specified. A response of “No.” to the intent of the original question is irresponsibly incorrect.
Even if their intent was indeed to specifically say people with ADHD are immune to stimulant addiction, while the correct first part of a response would be to say that definitely isn’t the case, it still implies some interaction with the studies showing the direct benefits of stimulant medication for people with ADHD struggling with addiction. Leaving the response at a negative would be factually correct, but still irresponsible to leave out the referred studies because the implication would be that it’s just some random made-up bullshit, increasing stigma, seeding skepticism of the actual studies, and just generally being unhelpful. It’s a topical discussion, so the appropriate thing is to actually address the topic at hand.
Also, starting off your comment with “chill the fuck out” and ending it with “feel free to block me.” is hilarious. I’m sorry, I’m not sure how to phrase that without it seeming like I’m mocking you, I just genuinely find it funny.