Originally posted by dadudemon
crylaugh
lol, and not to just make silly posts or anything
It just sort of bothers me when people are like "look, there couldn't possibly be something called X, because I don't have that problem. I mean look at how hard X is for me, they just aren't trying hard enough/the right thing"
as if that wasn't the first thing the scientists working on the problem thought. As if "try harder" were some secret new knowledge that only such radical gurus as one finds on the internet might have access to
Originally posted by inimalist
lol, and not to just make silly posts or anythingIt just sort of bothers me when people are like "look, there couldn't possibly be something called X, because I don't have that problem. I mean look at how hard X is for me, they just aren't trying hard enough/the right thing"
as if that wasn't the first thing the scientists working on the problem thought. As if "try harder" were some secret new knowledge that only such radical gurus as one finds on the internet might have access to
Oh yes, I could definitely tell where you were coming from with your jokes.
I don't think WS meant to imply that he had solved the LD problems, though: I think his post was more of a rant about why some people have problems learning: teachers don't stop to one on one with a problem student, in public schools, usually.
Originally posted by dadudemon
Oh yes, I could definitely tell where you were coming from with your jokes.I don't think WS meant to imply that he had solved the LD problems, though: I think his post was more of a rant about why some people have problems learning: teachers don't stop to one on one with a problem student, in public schools, usually.
no, I did take some liberties with it, for sure
but it is more the dismissing the issue as "not a real problem" rather than accepting that people have different issues, some being actual LDs.
Like, his response to someone even saying they had an LD was to say "I can't believe they have a name for it. I had trouble, this is how I got better". Basically, it is saying that the LD is the fault of the school, but ultimatly of the student for not getting the school to do what it wants.
Whether more one-to-one would help some LD or non-LD students, what can be done in the class, sure, totally valid issues. It is not helped by people thinking there is some scientific conspiracy to name things that afflict people yet really don't exist.
Originally posted by inimalist
no, I did take some liberties with it, for surebut it is more the dismissing the issue as "not a real problem" rather than accepting that people have different issues, some being actual LDs.
Like, his response to someone even saying they had an LD was to say "I can't believe they have a name for it. I had trouble, this is how I got better". Basically, it is saying that the LD is the fault of the school, but ultimatly of the student for not getting the school to do what it wants.
Whether more one-to-one would help [b]some
LD or non-LD students, what can be done in the class, sure, totally valid issues. It is not helped by people thinking there is some scientific conspiracy to name things that afflict people yet really don't exist. [/B]
I take comments like his for a grain of salt: most people aren't aware there are multiple kinds of dyslexia and ADD.
However, I can see why you would be slightly face-palming at his comments due to your professional interests in psychology.
I think ADD is complete bullshit and an excuse for modern parents who refuse to watch or take responsibility for their children as to why they do poorly in school and seem unable to focus.
Bottom line: take off your belt, bend them over your knee, and whip their little asses until they sit still and pay attention. Have the patience to instill a little discipline in them and see how that works before you take them to a doctor who prescribes all kinds of drugs under the sun that runs the risk of your kid ending up so depressed he/she kills themselves.
ADD is bad parenting. That problem is solved. When doctors can't come up with an actual diagnosis and psychologists still argue over the validity of it, something's wrong.
wow...well what i dreaded about school was doing stupid math homework that was so hard [the teacher taught the easy stuff in class] and i had to use B.O.B. [Back Of Book] for the answers, but couldn't show the work.
Boo math teachers that give easy examples in class and then give hard homework problems, and taunt us by picking the ones whos answers BOB knew but i didn't know how to proove...
Originally posted by Deja~vu
I just hated math. I moved quite a bit and never did grasp it all. Heck when you move 13 times by the time you're 11...well?
I really never got a full grasp of long division, which killed me later on in college doing long division of polynomials and shit in calculus.
Originally posted by Enyalus
I think ADD is complete bullshit and an excuse for modern parents who refuse to watch or take responsibility for their children as to why they do poorly in school and seem unable to focus.Bottom line: take off your belt, bend them over your knee, and whip their little asses until they sit still and pay attention. Have the patience to instill a little discipline in them and see how that works before you take them to a doctor who prescribes all kinds of drugs under the sun that runs the risk of your kid ending up so depressed he/she kills themselves.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19476419
Attention-deficit-hyperactivity disorder: an update
Dopheide JA, Pliszka SR
Pharmacotherapy. 2009 Jun;29(6):656-79.
Abstract
Attention-deficit-hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a common neuropsychiatric disorder that impairs social, academic, and occupational functioning in children, adolescents, and adults. In patients with ADHD, neurobiologic research has shown a lack of connectivity in key brain regions, inhibitory control deficits, delayed brain maturation, and noradrenergic and dopaminergic dysfunction in multiple brain regions. The prevalence of this disorder in the United States is 6-9% in youth (i.e., children and adolescents) and 3-5% in adults. Prevalence rates for youth are similar worldwide. Children with ADHD are at greater risk than children without ADHD for substance abuse and delinquency whether or not they receive drug therapy; however, early treatment with psychoeducation as well as drug therapy and/or behavioral intervention may decrease negative outcomes of ADHD, including the rate of conduct disorder and adult antisocial personality disorder. Drug therapy is effective for all age groups, even preschoolers, and for late-onset ADHD in adults. Stimulants, such as methylphenidate and amphetamine, are the most effective therapy and have a good safety profile; although recent concerns of sudden unexplained death, psychiatric adverse effects, and growth effects have prompted the introduction of other therapies. Atomoxetine, a nonstimulant, has no abuse potential, causes less insomnia than stimulants, and poses minimal risk of growth effects. Other drug options include clonidine and guanfacine, but both can cause bradycardia and sedation. Polyunsaturated fatty acids (fish oil), acetyl-L-carnitine, and iron supplements (for youth with low ferritin levels) show promise in improving ADHD symptoms. As long-term studies show that at least 50% of youth are nonadherent with their drug therapy as prescribed over a 1-year period, long-acting formulations (administered once/day) may improve adherence. Comorbid conditions are common in patients with ADHD, but this patient population can be treated effectively with individualized treatment regimens of stimulants, atomoxetine, or bupropion, along with close monitoring.
Originally posted by Enyalus
ADD is bad parenting. That problem is solved. When doctors can't come up with an actual diagnosis and psychologists still argue over the validity of it, something's wrong.
which psychologists?
Originally posted by Enyalus
The list of observed symptoms of ADHD can all be explained via 'laziness' and 'having other shit on your mind.' Honestly, how many times did all you sit in school (elementary and such) and daydream? It's pretty common.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17581453
Practice parameter for the assessment and treatment of children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder
Pliszka S
Journal of the American Academy of Child Adolescent Psychiatry 2007 Jul;46(7):894-921
Abstract
This practice parameter describes the assessment and treatment of children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) based on the current scientific evidence and clinical consensus of experts in the field. This parameter discusses the clinical evaluation for ADHD, comorbid conditions associated with ADHD, research on the etiology of the disorder, and psychopharmacological and psychosocial interventions for ADHD.
------------------------------
The full article is available here: http://www.aacap.org/galleries/PracticeParameters/New_ADHD_parameter.pdf
Please go throught this and explain in a coherent way how you think diagnostic criteria are akin to "daydreaming"
Originally posted by Enyalus
But now, no. **** it. You've got a disease.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20438138
Are there shared environmental influences on attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder? Reply to Wood, Buitelaar, Rijsdijk, Asherson, and Kunsti (2010).
Burt SA.
Psychological Bulletin 2010 May;136(3):341-3.
Abstract
A recent large-scale meta-analysis of twin and adoption studies indicated that shared environmental influences make important contributions to most forms of child and adolescent psychopathology (Burt, 2009b). The sole exception to this robust pattern of results was observed for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), which appeared to be largely genetic (and particularly nonadditive genetic) in origin, with no observable influence of the shared environment. The central thesis of Wood, Buitelaar, Rijsdijk, Asherson, and Kunsti (2010) is that, contrary to these findings, shared environmental influences are important for ADHD. As evidence for this thesis, Wood et al. presented a summary of prior twin studies, followed by a discussion of 4 methodological issues that may account for my findings in Burt (2009b). I argue that, although the methodological concerns raised by Wood et al. are very important, they do not undermine my earlier results (Burt, 2009b). I close with a discussion of 2 issues that may allow for some shared environmental influences on ADHD.
Originally posted by inimalist
The full article is available here: http://www.aacap.org/galleries/PracticeParameters/New_ADHD_parameter.pdfPlease go throught this and explain in a coherent way how you think diagnostic criteria are akin to "daydreaming"
Going from some of those numbers, they basically find that about 10% of children are diagnosed with ADHD. I think they listed the average 'lifetime childhood diagnosis of ADHD' as 7.8%, but in a lot of the studies they cited it was about 10%.
They go on to say that ADHD is primarily a genetic disorder. My first response to that is, really? Are you, inimalist, as an obviously well educated individual, going to tell me that 10% of the population of our children are genetically deficient? That's not only a huge number, it strains credulity. In an attempt to cover their bases (I guess?) they acknowledge that there are other causes of ADHD aside from genetic, which include neurobiological. This, to me, is the only thing that makes sense - if you're dealing with a mental/cognitive issue like ADHD, of course it's neurological in nature.
They then go on to say that children with ADHD show some minor problems with their cognitive processes (Let's be honest, the medical jargon of "neurocognitive processes that maintain an appropriate problem solving set to attain a future goal" is basically what I've just said - a minor problem in their cognitive ability). Nevertheless, the article admits that not all children who're diagnosed with ADHD have this issue at all...this begs the question, why were they diagnosed with ADHD when they do not display the main...problem....that having ADHD manifests?
Two real problems I had with the article were that it kept talking about the 'nine symptoms' of ADHD, but I could not find where it listed them. I'm positive I didn't miss them. It must be in another article.
Second is just something I had to point out, that I found funny for some reason. "The prevalence of mood disorders in patients with ADHD is more controversial, with studies showing from 0 to 33% of patients with ADHD meeting criteria for a depressive disorder."
0 to 33 percent? Seriously? That's a pretty big net. And it's not the only thing like that in there. There's a 4 to 30% deal on page 13, too.
My sister was diagnosed with having ADHD (in addition to dyslexia, which I'm not disputing.) Yes, she struggles in math and language arts/English. My opinion on the English thing though, is that she struggles because she doesn't like it. It's not fun for her. So she doesn't try. Not because she has ADHD and can't concentrate. She won't concentrate. I say this convincingly because although she uses her diagnosis with ADHD as an excuse for why she can't focus on her school work, I've seen her do things like sit in my floor for four hours straight playing Grand Theft Auto. I am betting that anyone who has been diagnosed with ADHD here, or who knows someone who has been diagnosed with it, has similar stories. If they aren't interested, they can't pay attention. But damn, if its entertaining and fun, they can do it all day just like any other normal kid. To me, that's a discipline problem. Not a medical one.
I mean, they're having middle school counselors diagnose these children with this supposed disease. If it's a valid disease and genetic and neurological in nature, why not have it be diagnosed with a CAT scan or MRI or such? But afterall, from your own article, "neuroimaging is a valuable research tool in the study of ADHD, but currently it is not useful for making a diagnosis of ADHD in a clinical practice or in predicting treatment response." Why is that?