371778_low CROP 1
Bookmark and Share

“ADHD makes a great excuse. The diagnosis can be an easy-to-reach-for crutch. Moreover, there’s an attractive element to an ADHD diagnosis, especially in adults. It can be exciting to think of oneself as involved in many things at once, rather than stuck in a boring rut.”

Richard Saul, MD, author of ADHD Does Not Exist

That’s the ticket! You think of your own or your loved one’s ADHD diagnosis as “exciting.”

If you’re depressed by sensationalistic headlines such as “ADHD Does Not Exist” or quack physicians marketing their unique ability to “find the root cause” of ADHD, then you should skip this post.

Before you go, though, take heart. Remember that the Internet is the Wild West for self-promoters and hucksters. It is not the real world—the world where serious people devote themselves to researching, treating patients, and developing helpful strategies for people with ADHD and their families. The preponderance of medical and scientific evidence says that ADHD Does Exist. And, that is not going to change. We will only continue to refine our knowledge, as has been the course of this condition in the medical literature for centuries.

It has been a long time since the ADHD Roller Coaster Hall of Shame  has named new inductees. And, it’s with a heavy heart that I do so now given the flurry of recent headlines.

ADHD skeptics come and go, each with their self-serving salespitch, but they become blips on the radar screen of progress. Undeterred and even unaware of these ridiculous rogues, science keeps marching on. There were far more ADHD-focused scientific papers published by this decade’s third year than were published in all of the 1990s, the so-called “Decade of the Brain.” In labs, clinics, and research centers internationally, there is no “controversy” about ADHD. There is wide and necessary acknowledgement that we don’t know everything, that the human brain is impossibly complex, but we know a great deal.

On the Internet, however, a different ethos prevails: Gaining web traffic and selling dubious books, services, and supplements by confusing the public about ADHD. These hucksters all claim to be “caring for the children,” but listen closely to what they really say and you will find that they unabashedly make unfounded statements that only worsen stigma and misinformation, all while burnishing their own lackluster image.

I believe there is much to lose if we let these people go unchallenged. You and I know these are fringe characters, but many other people do not know that. And that creates problems for everyone.

Recently, with the latest story on ADHD in The New York Times by Alan Schwarz  and an outrageously titled book debuting called ADHD Does Not Exist, the floodgates gush open anew. This rogue physician and The New York Times seem to  have given every two-bit website and hit-hungry “news organization” carte blanche to perform the neuroscientific equivalent of climate-change denial.

(Forgive me for not providing links, only partial screen images; I refuse to “take the bait” and play into their obvious  gambits to increase web traffic on the backs of people with ADHD.)

In a future post, I will de-bunk Schwarz’s scurrilous and cherry-picked arguments. Right now, I’d like to welcome a few of this week’s standouts to the ADHD Roller Coaster Hall of Shame, all directly connected to the promotional machine behind ADHD Does Not Exist. These alleged news organizations  stoop to new lows of Yellow Journalism.

As both a journalist and an ADHD expert, I’m astounded that some unknown neurologist in Illinois with virtually no prominence or history of publication is suddenly elevated to equal footing with a preponderance of medical evidence—and accorded worldwide coverage, with none of his statements checked or balanced. (Granted, none of these websites are generally considered reliable, but some still believe that The New York Times is reliable.) All it took was an outrageous book title: ADHD Does Not Exist.  And the publicity machine of Harper Collins. The book has apparently already been translated into German and perhaps other languages. The publicity has appeared in the UK, Australia, Germany, and the U.S..

In addition to acting as lackeys for Harper Collins, the following “news outlets” showed very poor judgment in their photo illustrations. If I had the graphic designers’ names, I would welcome them into the Hall of Shame along with the editors and columnists below.

First, there’s that bastion of science reporting, The New York Post,
and columnist Kyle Smith; he obviously writes from the press release and never questions the legitimacy of Saul’s opinion or the fact that Saul primarily talks about misdiagnoses and not ADHD itself.  (Note: Saul’s idea of misdiagnoses might in fact be accurate diagnoses. I explain more about that here.)

The New York Post

The Post’s Smith also freely throws in his own ill-formed opinions:

Patients show up at the clinic with their own ADHD diagnoses these days, simply because ADHD is in the air all around us — and because they want to score some delightful drugs like Adderall or Ritalin, or because their parents want an easy way to get them to sit down and shut up.

Adderall and Ritalin are stimulants, though, and the more you take them the more you develop a tolerance for them, which can lead to a dangerous addiction spiral.

Next, this Australian website picked up the Post’s meager column, substituting an even more offensive photo, showing that neither the editors nor the graphic designers share a clue about ADHD. It’s not about “children behaving badly.” It’s about children and adults who have a valid neurocognitive condition that affects self-regulation. These children have enough problems with bullies; they don’t need more bullying from the media or from the neurologist who claims to have their best interests at heart. But bullies they are.

news.com.au

Yes, some children with ADHD are rambunctious and even aggressive, but many are shy and conflict-averse. Perpetuating this myth that ADHD is a “behavior” disorder caused by lax parenting leads to barbaric calls for “treating ADHD” with corporal punishment, such as by other marginal figures as developmental pediatrician Larry Diller (a favored source of The New York Times’ Schwarz, who could use a lesson in vetting sources and talking to bona fide experts).

Interestingly enough, this news.com.au website prominently touts its editorial decision-makers’ expertise, so you’d think there would have been more deliberation behind running this piece. After all, Deputy Editor Lisa Muxworthy has reportedly been a journalist for more than 16 years, with experience reporting on politics, health and general news.  And News Editor Kate de Brito, who the site says has been a reporter, columnist, and feature writer for more than 20 years,  “loves working online for the speed, variety and reader feedback.” (Maybe a little less speed would allow a more deliberative editorial process.)  And oh dear, she is also a “trained counsellor”—though surely not in mental health, because what kind of psychotherapist would approve of this awful piece and the photos?

The UK’s Daily Mail did a slightly better job by at least talking to a few reputable sources, but the paper still qualifies as a full-fledged Hall of Shame honoree by running this headline…and these photos.

 

Daily Mail

Daily Mail

 

Finally and perhaps predictably, The Washington Times makes a mockery of reporting by running this:

 

If you can’t see that illustration, here is a larger version.

Mike Meyers’ depiction of a “hyperactive” child

What’s especially ludicrous about the Washington Times’ contribution from Cheryl K. Chumley is that it continually cites The New York Post, as if it were a real piece of reporting and not a re-hash of a press release embellished with the columnist’s uninformed opinions.

Now more than ever, vetting news sources and experts is critically important. These headlines represent only a small slice of what is happening not only in ADHD coverage but every other topic of importance.

And, with that, I welcome all these complicit characters to the ADHD Roller Coaster Hall of Shame.  May they some day take a science course, learn about ADHD, and learn how to report the news.

And, may parents everywhere not be taken in by charlatans who advertise on their websites this kind of myth about ADHD from the website of Richard Saul, author of ADHD Does Not Exist (yes, even in this barebones website Saul did not notice that medicine is misspelled; were you not paying attention, Richard, or is accuracy simply unimportant to you in all things?):

We always want to address challenges with the right diagnosis, and  that takes parents who are pro-active in reading and learning so they can pursue the best care for their child. If food sensitivities are causing a child’s cognitive problems, those should be addressed.  But make no mistake: Any physician who claims that ADHD is not a valid disorder is lying to you. And perhaps to himself.

Gina Pera

Bookmark and Share

Tags: ,

  1. C.R. Everett’s avatar

    Ask anyone married to anyone with ADHD and they’ll tell you it’s real. And stimulant medications absolutely do help for a positive change, not for chasing some “high.”

    Reply

    1. Gina Pera’s avatar

      Definitely true, CR. Ask any parent of a child with ADHD, too.

      ADHD is very much real, and to deprive people who have it of legitimate information is a new class of low.

    2. C. Diam’s avatar

      While it makes sense to question things, why would the scientific community dedicate so many resources and so much time to something that doesn’t exist? There are EXPERTS on ADHD, who specialize in the study of it. This guy is clearly too narrow-minded to be a doctor, and I would never let him see my children.

    3. Gina Pera’s avatar

      Hi C — good question.

      I think it plays to the “contrarian” attitude among some people. Or should I say “conspiracy theorist”?

      The idea that all the rest of medical science is wrong, and there’s this little ol’ unknown neurologist in Illinois who has the One True Answer.

      That’s why I call them the equivalent of climate-change deniers.

      Best,
      g

    4. Liz’s avatar

      I completely agree with Dr. Saul. It is a brilliant book. I have worked with special education children for over 20 years as a Speech and Language Pathologist, and every student I encountered with a diagnosis of “ADHD” had one or more conditions such as vision problems, hearing problems , lead poisoning, autism spectrum, etc. Of course ” ADHD”is a collection of symptoms- that is how it is “diagnosed”! I believe ADHD is a false disorder as well as Oppositional Defiance Disorder; the newest IEP label to excuse kids from poor behavior. Also, if you allow an “ADHD child to do something they love to do- suddenly they are no longer ADHD!

    5. Gina Pera’s avatar

      Sorry, Liz. It is obvious that you don’t know the first thing about ADHD, including the fact that the underlying neurobiology can itself cause problems with hearing, vision, sensory issues, motor coordination, and even speech. It would behoove your work to learn more about ADHD so you are not susceptible to nincompoops such as Saul. Children depend on your being knowledgeable.

    6. shannontahern’s avatar

      The assumption that ADHD is fabricated is asinine and can only be proffered by people who have ZERO experience with it. A person WITHOUT ADHD responds to stimulants as if they are, you know, stimulants. However, a person WITH ADHD responds completely DIFFERENTLY. It’s biochemical and it’s OBVIOUS.

      So, people who know nothing? How about you STFU and stop stigmatizing (further) an observable, legitimate neurobiological variation.

      Reply

      1. Gina Pera’s avatar

        haha! Couldn’t have said it better myself, Shannon. Thanks for the backup!

      2. samantha v’s avatar

        Thank you! I agree 100%. As a person who has ADD, and a mother of an ADHD child, I find it incredibly insulting that this doctor/author refers to people who use stimulant medications are chasing some kind of high and refers to them as ‘delightful’ drugs. That is the most ludicrous thing I’ve ever heard. Perhaps, in the case of wrong diagnoses and misuse of the medications, they may be viewed that way. However, for someone who actually has ADD/ADHD, the experience is NOTHING like that. These medications are life changing and absolutely needed. And, to be honest, I can’t believe this man thinks that any parent out there would give their child something in an attempt of chasing some kind of high. What parent wants their child to be high? Or drug addicted? I have stopped my meds in order to have another baby and while in search of a new doctor in the past. And can tell you I certainly am not now, nor was I then, drug addicted. He needs to spend some time with families who have parents and/or children affected by this disorder, not just a few minutes in a clinical setting. And do some real science-based research on the disorder. What an ass.

      3. Gina Pera’s avatar

        You’re exactly right, Samantha. Thanks for your comment.

        I think this neurologist does not want to know the truth. It would interfere with his marketing strategy.

      4. C. Diam’s avatar

        In reply to Samatha: I agree with you. I have ADD inattentive type, my stepfather has it, and my younger sister has ADHD. We all take medication, and the things it does to my body are not pleasant: I lose weight, look less attractive, can’t sleep, and am dehydrated almost all of the time. Oh, and I have to eat about three times as much as I would otherwise just to keep myself satiated since it speeds up my metabolism, and to keep my weight in check, which often drops too much for me to continue taking it. Then, because of the metabolism thing, if I work out, I am hungry almost constantly to the point that I again, can’t concentrate, which is what the medicine helps me do in the first place. As such, while they help my concentration, motivation and energy level, these are not “delightful drugs” at all, and he clearly has no clue.

      5. Gina Pera’s avatar

        Exactly, C. So much for “quick fixes.” He is clueless. And more importantly, seems to want to remain that way.

        I hope that you keep looking for ways to round out your treatment. You should not have to be suffering so many side effects in order to get benefits. You might want to check out some of the less-talked-about issues such as in Dr. Charles Parker’s book. http://www.amazon.com/New-ADHD-Medication-Rules-Attention/dp/B00DIKYPHS/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1389670141&sr=1-1&keywords=paying+attention+to+the+meds

        Maybe even look into a good assessment of your vitamin/mineral status, too.

        My MD just did this Spectracell test for me, and I was very impressed with its thoroughness. My scientist husband was impressed with the test and the way the information is presented, too. I trust his opinion.

        http://www.spectracell.com/patients/patient-micronutrient-testing/
        Good luck!
        Gina

      6. TB’s avatar

        Agree, any parent can see the mental and physical aspects of ADHD in their children. My 12yr hates taking medication and tries to control impulses etc He cannot do it alone. Anyone who really has this does not want it

        Reply

        1. KK’s avatar

          Is that a direct screen shot? If it is, he needs to proof it better…it’s medicine, not medinicine.

          He wants to un-medicate my daughter and live with her without an ounce of compassion for what it does to her, her life and her family, he’s welcome to try. Not treating her was inhumane. Treating her was love.

          Reply

          1. Gina Pera’s avatar

            Hi KK — I wondered who would catch that! :-) Yes, it’s a screen shot.

            Guess the ADHD-denying doc has problems with details?

            Yes, exactly. Love and compassion and willingness to consider new ideas.

            best,
            g

          2. Holly Seerley, MA, MFT’s avatar

            KK, Yup. It is often a difficult choice for parents to make—medication. But I do not recall any parent I have woke with who made the medication choice who has come back and said they regret it. Instead parents have regretted not trying it sooner. They often see how much easier it is for their child to actually be themselves and in better control of decision-making. The right meds at the right dose can be life-giving.

            Holly Seerley, MFT

            Reply

            1. Gina Pera’s avatar

              Right Holly. And the wrong meds at any dose are another reason we have such confusion around ADHD.

              tx
              g

            2. Holly Seerley, MA, MFT’s avatar

              Gina, I sure wish all prescribers would follow the model used in the NIMH research. When behavior baseline checklists and follow ups are done, it is so much easier to figure out how meds are or are not working. And when parents are educated that one med causing side effects or not being effective does NOT predict that their child will react similarly to all stimulants, then parents don’t give up on the first trial. Adults too. I know you know this all too well.

              Holly

              Reply

              1. Gina Pera’s avatar

                Yes, I include this kind of information on medication in my book.

                Precisely so that consumers could help guide their physicians.

              2. bonfanoid’s avatar

                He should have taken the Coursera course “Pay Attention!!” (by Dr. Rostain) and payed some attention!!!

                As someone who has been diagnosed and started treatment at age 64 (after retirement), I want to add this: I am thoroughly pissed off, angry at, apalled by, not amused at all and tired of people (especially when they out to know better – by their profession) who are inclined to making other peoples lives more difficult and miserable through ignorance or even (semi-) professional activities – as like in this this case – appearently driven by the wish to make some easy money on the expense of others – or does he present any scientifically approved research data ( maybe his own?) to support his case?.

                Professor Rostain has also adressed (providing data) issues like: over-diagnosing
                of ADHS (false), over-prescribing of drugs (false), (increased) addiction as a result of intake as prescribed (false).

                I am looking forward to the (necessary) increase of awareness in the public about the topic through websites like this one.

                Thank you for your work, Gina.

                Reply

                1. Gina Pera’s avatar

                  You’re most welcome, bonafanoid. Thanks for noticing my work. :-)

                  It would be wonderful if Saul took Dr. Rostain’s course (talk about a wonderful ADHD expert!).

                  But maybe that is the problem: Saul can’t pay attention! It presents quite a conundrum, when you can’t pay attention in order to learn about paying attention. You’d think he’d have more compassion for folks with ADHD. ;-)

                  g

                2. Dr Charles Parker’s avatar

                  Gina,
                  Saul joins the NYT in its repeated sensational misrepresentation of a clearly biological condition. Schwarz and Saul quite obviously seize on the *180 Degree Reverse-Marketing Concept:* First find the pulse of gossip, then convert it to a song, and jump our of your cave to dance around the campfire. Work up a sweat with school yard thinking whilst shouting in the darkness of denial.

                  Categorical Opposites:
                  1. Market the categorical opposite of scientific inquiry & discovery since the 1930′s – great headlines, makes the front page, puts the author’s kids through college. No attribution, rather self-opinion.
                  2. Completely renounce rapidly growing cellular data – brain evidence that applies to Executive Function Disorder from brain researchers.
                  3. Disdain technology and critical thinking – and completely ignore the thousands who have progressed with appropriate medical attention. Are those thousands simply ‘true believers?’

                  This anti-intellectual trend would make Galileo smirk in the heavens as he will quickly recognize parallels between now and his times – how the Church in the 1600s decided the telescopic discoveries were wrong, especially when everyone could see that the sun rotates around the earth – everyday…

                  Yes, seeing is believing to the anti-intellectual, the non-curious, and the reductionistic, regressive reactionaries who seek to pander on undeniable challenges built in to measurements of behavioral exactitude.

                  Behavioral measures are inadequate, but not incorrect. It’s an accurate observation that ADHD medication protocols need a significant upgrade, and that ADHD diagnosis is a problem, but let’s not throw the baby out with the bathwater.

                  Those who suffer with Executive Function Challenges deserve, as you so accurately demonstrate, more consideration than pictures of kids screaming. Those pictures work for the campfire games, but only destructively undermine the rapidly evolving functional science, that neither author remotely understands.

                  As for us, let’s work with Galileo who said:
                  “Measure what is measurable, and make measurable what is not so.”

                  Also they both need to curl up with the best work that covers the intricacy of current Executive Function Challenges: “Science and Sanity – An Introduction to Non-Aristotelian Systems and General Semantics” by Alfred Korzybski. He might curb their anti-complexity fervor with improved big-picture thinking.

                  Kudos for standing up to be counted. Thanks for this interesting piece. Press on.

                  Chuck
                  Author: New ADHD Medication Rules – Brain Science & Common Sense

                  Reply

                  1. Gina Pera’s avatar

                    Well said, Chuck! My longtime ally in clarifying these issues!

                  2. Kaylee’s avatar

                    I am an adult with recently diagnosed ADHD. I have suffered a lifetime of bullying, ridicule, criticism and shame. And what’s worse, I thought it really was all my fault, that I really was “lazy”, “stupid” and “irresponsible”.

                    I could have been on medication many, many years ago. A doctor tried to prescribe Ritalin for me when I was a child but my mother was afraid to give it to me because she “heard bad things about it”.

                    In my early 20′s, after my first diagnosis, I refused to take Ritalin because I had “heard bad things about it”.

                    And when I finally did give in and try the Ritalin, I only experienced the life altering effects of it briefly before being cut off by a misinformed doctor who didn’t understand how it works.

                    I recently began taking Vyvanse and even at the low trial dose of 20mg have experienced a wonderful change in my life. The ability to think clearly, to make decisions easily, and to focus on a task and complete it without feeling overwhelmed. These simple pleasures are what I get from taking a stimulant, things that others take for granted, that just come naturally to them.

                    So to me, this Richard Saul’s assertion that adults who seek out an ADHD diagnoses are just looking to score some drugs is highly offensive. I have never used drugs. I don’t even smoke and rarely drink alcohol.

                    Dependence and addiction are two different things. There are many people with serious medical conditions who are dependant on medication to be able to function and live a normal life. And many of those medications are far more dangerous than those used to treat ADHD. And yet no one calls them addicts.

                    Alcohol and cigarettes claim thousands of lives every year, and not just those of the people who use them, but those of innocent bystanders. And yet they are readily available and not controlled as strictly as the stimulants used to treat ADHD.

                    (For those who do not know, the stimulants used to treat ADHD are “controlled substances”, which means there are very strict rules to be followed by the prescribing physician and pharmacist. And that getting them is not so easy as Mr. Saul would have you believe.)

                    “Exciting” and “an easy to reach for crutch” has to be the most inaccurate description I have ever seen for ADHD. There is nothing easy about living with ADHD. In fact, I have to work twice as hard as anyone else just to keep up. And it’s exhausting. Taking a stimulant is one way to help me keep up and alleviate that exhaustion, so that one day I may actually be able to enjoy having luxuries like a career, financial security and a home of my own. Things that, up until now, have always been nothing more than a dream. Now, for the first time, they seem like they might actually be attainable.

                    It is no surprise to me that the media latched on to this story so quickly. It’s just the kind of sensational headline that they love. Things like scientific research and facts are boring. They don’t sell newspapers or increase traffic on your website.

                    Reply

                    1. Gina Pera’s avatar

                      Good for you, Kaylee, that you kept your mind open despite all the things you’d “heard about.”

                      Yes, it’s sensation-seeking at its worst.

                      The day after the recent NYT story came out, the Washington Post ran a very balanced story based on interviews with top experts. Did that get posted and go viral? No, it wasn’t exciting enough.

                      But Schwarz cherry-picks data and interviews fringe characters, and suddenly it’s gospel.

                      The public needs to be cautious and vet their sources, but I’m afraid that is becoming a lost art.

                    2. C. Diam’s avatar

                      I’ve had similar experiences. Keep doing what helps you and allows you to do what you want to achieve.

                    3. bonfanoid’s avatar

                      For anybody who might be interested in digging deeper into the subject of how
                      drugs function inside the brain I recommend to take a close look at the Coursera course “Drugs and the Brain”, which has started just a couple of days ago.
                      There is no need to feel shame or be defensive about trying to find out what works best for a person who is (desperately) seeking to establish a somewhat “normal” functionality of the brain and trying to make one’s work life easier.
                      And even smoking can help under certain circumstances. I myself – who hates smoking – use every once in a while a cigarette to calm myself down and enhance my ability to focus. After years of trying (lots of prescriptions by MDs), I have finally discovered that the one thing that puts me to sleep without regret – is a joint. Since all these “substances” (and others) in question are natural ingrediences of the brain’s own pool of neurotransmitters the lack (or malfunction) thereof has to be adressed accordingly.
                      Science and (recent) findings of scientific research and personal experience as well leave no room for doubt about the
                      validity of this attitude.

                      Reply

                      1. Gina Pera’s avatar

                        Hi Bonfanoid —

                        That course sounds interesting; I’ll look for it.

                        I know that a Coursera offering on ADHD was done by respected ADHD MD Tony Rostain, co-director (with Russ Ramsay, PhD) of the UPenn Adult ADHD Clinic. That’s worth looking into.

                        And, I hate to disagree with you, but I would encourage you to be extremely cautious about using marijuana in that way (or any way). Especially with baseline ADHD. I know. I KNOW that it helps many people with ADHD to feel calmer and to go to sleep. But we have evidence that it can be further impairing — to motivation and to working memory — and on top of that, it creates an addiction.

                        I know it can be tough to fall asleep at night, but truly, there are many other options to try before marijuana.

                        It might be that something like 5-HTP (serotonin precursor) would help. Or, sometimes even a low dose of stimulant at night helps to “focus” on going to sleep and tuning out all the other thoughts. There are other possibilities that don’t involve Rx or involve Rx that are less risky than marijuana.

                        best,
                        g

                      2. Matt C’s avatar

                        I couldn’t tell how to reply to Ms Pera’s reply, but this is to address her message:

                        Out of respect for your evident knowledge in the general field, may I ask what is the basis for your assertion that marijuana creates an addiction? Or, perhaps just a clarification on the resulting addiction and marijuana’s role in creating it?

                        Cheers,
                        -Matt

                      3. Gina Pera’s avatar

                        Hi Matt,

                        Thanks for your question, so politely phrased. :-)

                        I am reporting the opinion of experts much more learned than I am, regarding people with ADHD “self-medicating” with marijuana. I’m not speaking of marijuana in general, for people who have no baseline psychiatric or neurocognitive conditions, though that apparently is problematic enough.

                        Anecdotally, I know many people with ADHD who, often prior to diagnosis, used marijuana to help them get to sleep. Then to alleviate anxiety around work/study. Then, it was a daily habit. At today’s very strong marijuana levels (compared to, say, the 1980s), that’s a problem. ADHD already presents problems with initiation, motivation, and working memory. Adding a compound that further reduces those functions seems a very poor idea to me.

                        I do appreciate that some people with ADHD honestly feel relief from marijuana, but there are much better ways of dealing with the anxiety or sleep problems that are often co-existing with ADHD. For one thing, stimulants alone are too often prescribed to people with ADHD, with no concern from the physician about co-existing depression and anxiety. I can’t count how many people I’ve heard from who take Adderall only and feel they must smoke marijuana every night to deal with the anxiety, sleeplessness. It is bad doctoring that causes these people to be vulnerable to marijuana’s perceived benefits.

                        It’s a complicated issue, I know. And I’ve seen the ferocity with which people argue for the “natural” medication of ADHD. When it comes to brain function, however, I prefer to consult the brain scientists with no skin in the game of marijuana production and profit, such as NIDA’s Nora Volkow. She is an impressive scientist made all the more impressive because she has devoted her career to public service, in particular changing the discourse around addictions to be a more compassionate, scientific one. She could easily have gone into private industry and made many times the salary—and with less controversy. Here’s what Dr. Volkow says:

                        The use of marijuana can produce adverse physical, mental, emotional, and behavioral effects. It can impair short-term memory and judgment and distort perception. Because marijuana affects brain systems that are still maturing through young adulthood, its use by teens may have a negative effect on their development. And contrary to popular belief, it can be addictive.

                        http://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/marijuana-abuse/letter-director

                        more info here:

                        http://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/marijuana-abuse/marijuana-addictive

                        1. Drew’s avatar

                          Gina, I decided to go on medication after reading your book and I’ve never looked back. I was having marital struggles and my ADHD was part of it. My marriage is as well as ever and medication was very helpful (there were other issues but me recognizing ADHD and seeking treatment was imperative). Drugs that create dependency destroy families, so the assertion feels like a personal affront.

                          However, I believe impugning the character of someone is a slippery slope. I want that reserved for the realm of politics (actually I want it out of that too but I am being realistic). My life is a walking billboard for medication and a testament to those with an ear to hear. Fortunately for me my colleagues are on my side and I have converted a lot of people along the way.

                          Reply

                          1. Gina Pera’s avatar

                            Hi Drew,

                            I’m so glad my book was helpful. Good for you, for seizing the information and running with it.

                            If I’m understanding your point, you think that I am “impugning the character” of this neurologist. In fact, I am impugning his actions, which I find despicable. If he had his way, you would NOT be getting treatment that you deserve. And, that is not acceptable.

                            I believe that people should speak out. There is already so much misinformation around ADHD, these shameless charlatans and attention-seekers can do great harm. Harm that influences public policy, in fact, such as with Senator Chuck Grassley’s unrelenting attacks on psychiatric researchers — all in the name of “protecting the children.”

                            We take for granted the excellent ADHD medication options in this country. People internationally write to me all the time, expressing their frustration that they have little to no access. And, we could lose this access if we don’t call out the nonsense and stand by the evidence — and the people with ADHD.

                            So, no I brook none of this nonsense. The stakes are too high. I see the after-effects of each shameless book, each headline-grabbing article. They have real and lasting effects. Tolerance is not an option, in my opinion. Only vigilance.

                            I’m glad your colleagues are supportive.

                            Best,
                            g

                          2. ginniebean’s avatar

                            Gina,

                            Thank you for calling this guy out. I sincerely think people do not understand the harm this type of misinformation can do. Adhd as a diagnosis has Always been attacked, nothing new there. However, I do notice a huge uptick in challenging the research and it doesn’t necessarily have to be a reasonable challenge. It’s like people are already primed to hear ADHD isn’t real, and this kind of stuff sets them off and reinforces antagonism to any person with adhd getting help.

                            How can this guy even keep a medical licence when adhd is the most studied child hood disorder?

                            Reply

                            1. Gina Pera’s avatar

                              I agree, ginniebean. We can’t take anything for granted these days.

                              There are some powerful and well-funded forces out there, wreaking havoc in all kinds of ways.

                              Hold the line! :-)

                              g

                            2. bonfanoid’s avatar

                              Thank you Gina for your response – I especially appreciate your way of
                              being supportive while expressing your concern – re use of marijuana – and I
                              also have to thank Matt for putting his question in a way that I have been looking for (alas, unsuccessfully so..:-)), for some time now (English is not my first language).
                              I want to add that it was not my intent to propagate the use of marijuana on a
                              regular basis (especially not for young people) and I have never done so myself – actually my sleep pattern has vastly improved after developing and training
                              several relaxation techniques that I am mostly using now – takes some time and effort, though.

                              cheers

                              Reply

                              1. Gina Pera’s avatar

                                Hi bonfanoid,

                                Thanks for your clarification. And I’m happy to hear that your sleep pattern has improved. My next book was supposed to be about ADHD and sleep, but I was prevailed upon to write/edit a book for therapists on ADHD couple therapy. It has been a LOT of work but is almost done.

                                here’s a blog post I wrote on sleep and ADHD; the comments are particularly enlightening.

                                To be sure: I’m not the marijuana police. :-) And I make no moral judgments. I just am concerned about people with ADHD not getting the help they deserve and being forced to find what works for them, even if only the short-term, and might make things worse for them.

                                That’s one thing I greatly admire about Dr. Volkow, in addition to her scientific rigor and attitude of public service. She has made it her mission in life to understand why people become addicted and to adopt a more understanding/compassionate/practical attitude. Instead of shaming people and locking them up in jail — or putting them through expensive and often futile drug treatment programs that ignore underlying neurobiology — she promotes education and knowledge.

                                I wrote this piece about her: http://www.ginapera.com/images/experts.pdf

                                Thanks for the conversation.

                                Gina

                              2. Christopher Staeheli’s avatar

                                A simple question for this Neurologist, Dr. Saul: do headaches exist?

                                Thanks for countering this dangerous physician. It is unfortunate that the media has now widely promoted and published Dr. Saul’s scientifically unsupported thoughts. There are other Authors, like one at the New york Times who make their living attacking the diagnosis and treatment of AD/HD. I would be amazing if a major News paper or magazine actually published an article on the individuals and families who have so clearly benefitted from having their AD/HD diagnosed and effectively treated. The over diagnosis of Bipolar disorder, then inappropriate treatment, has been extremely damaging to many children. By far the majority of Children who come to me labelled “bipolar” are not and most actually have untreated or poorly treated ADHD. I will do here what Dr. Saul did, site one case, I saw a boy on 6 medications for Bipolar disorder and had been tried on many more and nothing worked. Once his AD/HD was effectively treated he was on a single medication and went on to be extremely successful at home and school, he was simply a fast metabolizer and required a higher dose of a stimulant and treatment covering the whole day. It is dangerous and damaging though to use one patient anecdote instead of real scientific data, that said every single patient is unique and must be treated that way. Dr. Saul has done a great disservice. Thanks for refuting him. PS. DR. Saul just created a new “cause” for a headache, so I guess headaches do exist.

                                Reply

                                1. Gina Pera’s avatar

                                  Great points, Christopher. I know of several people with ADHD who, when given Adderall, displayed more “bi-polar” symptoms such as mania and increased aggression. Their physicians said that the stimulant had “unmasked” bi-polar. Instead, it was later determined that Adderall simply was not the right stimulant for this person. I wonder how often this happens with children diagnosed with bi-polar (which no doubt exists in children nonetheless).

                                  Thanks for your comments,
                                  g

                                2. miranda’s avatar

                                  hi everyone,

                                  I’ve read all of your comments with interest. I am a trainee primary school teacher who is currently working on a presentation focusing on aspects of ADHD.

                                  I have looked at Dr. Saul’s work and I find it interesting along with some other literature reviews that diagnosis has become “muddled” in some cases and unfortunately some children are misdiagnosed. I do not believe there are not people suffering with ADHD for one minute. There is enough evidence to support that. However, from a teacher’s point of view I thought you guys might be pleased that this has strengthened the cause to take each child as an individual and to work with the parents on issues around learning difficulties.

                                  May I address all the mum’s, dad’s and carers of children with ADHD please.
                                  How would you like to be involved/have been involved with the teacher of your child and supporting their learning? I feel that communication and teamwork between families and outside professionals that may become involved is essential. Is this your experience? Would any one like to give me any tips that I could apply in my future profession for the benefit of children who suffer with ADHD.

                                  Thank you in advance.
                                  Miranda

                                  Reply

                                3. Stan Mould’s avatar

                                  I agree with every word you say against this Dr Saul idiot but ‘sensationalistic’? No such word. You do yourself a disservice by your poor use of English.

                                  The adjective is ‘sensationalist’ – no ‘ic’.

                                  Sorry, I have AD/HD – I’m picky and also a British English teacher from England!

                                  Reply

                                  1. Gina Pera’s avatar

                                    Hi Stan,

                                    Ha! My Brit friends on Facebook love to correct my grammar, too. And they’re usually right! Of course, because I spend all day writing and editing (a new book for couple therapists), my poor brain sometimes lapses into my Southern colloquialisms when writing informally. :-)

                                    According to the World English dictionary, sensationalist is both a noun and adjective whereas sensationalistic is an adjective. So maybe I’m not the New World heathen you have mistaken me for? :-)

                                    At least we agree on Dr. Saul, and that’s the important thing!

                                    Thanks for writing,
                                    g

                                  2. Stan Mould’s avatar

                                    The World English dictionary is wrong and so are you to rely on it. It’s an AMERICAN dictionary, and Americans love to lengthen words t appear more important than they are (the people, not the words).

                                    Adding the suffix ‘ic’ is nothing to do with being from the Southern US, it’s all do do with poor use of English, sorry.

                                    Sensation can mean ‘a widespread feeling of excitement’

                                    Sensational can mean ‘arousing the senses’ or ‘exceptionally good’

                                    Sensationalist can mean ‘A PERSON who indulges in, or believes in, sensational behaviour or actions’. With this definition, it is a noun.

                                    So, you have TWO redundant suffixes to the word ‘sensational’ which is the one you should have used to describe Dr Saul’s stupid little book. ;-)

                                    Sorry, I’m an English teacher, have AD/HD and probably a good salting of Asperger’s or some flavour of autism too … :-)

                                    Reply

                                    1. Gina Pera’s avatar

                                      Haha! Don’t hold back, Stan. Give it to me straight!

                                      Here’s the rub: If I had described Saul’s “stupid little book” as “sensational,” readers (at least here in the U.S.) would take that to mean that I found it a wonderful book! The best ever! Awesome!

                                      g

                                    2. Stan Mould’s avatar

                                      I always do – I’m from the North East of England and we are pretty blunt! Sorry.

                                      However, you are quite right, although I think I would have described it in any review I made as ‘an overly-sensational and somewhat stupid book’.

                                      As you know, I don’t hold back … :-)

                                      Reply

                                      1. Gina Pera’s avatar

                                        :-) Yes, you’re right. I vaguely remember questioning that word as I typed it. What I’ve learned, though, is if I try to perfect everything I type, I will feel overwhelmed by every blog post and comment to stupid articles on ADHD. My motto is: Progress not perfection.

                                        In my book, however, I reviewed each draft at least 50 times (or more) and hired three copy editors and proof readers. The printed word requires more care.

                                        tx
                                        g

                                      2. Stan Mould’s avatar

                                        That’s always the way – when you write something, especially for print, it always needs careful thought- you can have an army of subs and copy-writers, but human nature being what it is, people tend not to question, even though it’s their job.

                                        One thing I realised about Dr Saul is that he was born in about the 30′s or 40′s and I suspect has a mind-set still rooted in those times – that might be a point worth making publicly.

                                        Also, you may enjoy reading (and joining in with) this thread from the British newspaper, The Guardian. http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/mar/11/pronunciation-errors-english-language?CMP=fb_ot&commentpage=26

                                        It’s an amusing battle between US and UK English speakers, but extremely interesting if you like the origins of language, and how it changes.

                                        Thank you for not taking umbrage at my bluntness – have a good one (American phrase we BE speakers have adopted!) :-)

                                        PS – what’s the book? I might be interested …

                                        Reply

                                        1. Gina Pera’s avatar

                                          Hi Stan,

                                          Regarding Saul, I am reluctant to be an ageist. The fool man’s age isn’t the problem. Paul Wender is probably older than Saul, and he is the “Dean of ADHD,” having contributed remarkably to putting ADHD on the map and still lecturing at Harvard. http://www.webmd.com/paul-h-wender

                                          Rather, I think Saul is simply arrogant and in many ways overestimates his abilities as a physician. The best physicians, in my opinion, have a good bit of the scientist in their mindset. Saul, by contrast, is a simple-minded proceduralist. He seems to understand nothing of the ADHD neurobiology.

                                          I am reading his book now, and it’s an abomination. For information on vision problems, he cites the Lenscrafters website! And the rest of his “citations” aren’t much better.

                                          He is a joke, a charlatan, a quack, and the foolish tool of some avaricious shark at Harper Collins, owned by Murdoch.

                                          As for my next book, Routledge Press asked me to produce a clinical guide for couple therapists. It’s been 18 months in the making, and I’m almost at the finish line. Whew!

                                          best,
                                          g

                                        2. Liz’s avatar

                                          Dr. Saul is not saying that any of the symptoms commonly referred to as ADHD are not problematic or distressing – he indicates that these symptoms are severe enough for someone to seek help. He is not saying that these symptoms don’t exist – I believe that Instead of diagnosing a child or adult with ADHD the diagnostician should dig deeper to determine other conditions that may be causing problems. For instance, I had symptoms of ADD as a child, but as it turned out I had in diagnosed double vision and a hearing loss- of course I would have a hard time attending to information at school.

                                          Reply

                                          1. Gina Pera’s avatar

                                            As I said, Liz, ADHD is associated with auditory deficits. Vision problems, too. Perhaps you truly had ADHD — and still do. If so, medication often helps with these issues, and it helps globally instead of targeting, as Saul would advise, piecemeal symptoms with insufficient solutions.

                                            Saul is operating out of a 1950s mindset. He fails to make connections between the dopamine system and the various issues he cites as unrelated to ADHD. The book has flopped miserably, despite an aggressive and no doubt expensive media campaign. It currently ranks at 265,000 on Amazon. By contrast, my award-winning book was published six years ago and tonight it is at 10,000. Consumers aren’t stupid.

Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>