- About
- Blogosphere Buzz
- Archived Posts 2007-2008
- Register for Email Alerts
- The Book: Before You Take That Pill: Why the Drug Industry May Be Bad For Your Health
- Follow me on twitter @dougbremner
- Subscribe to my podcasts
- Rave Reviews for “The Goose That Laid the Golden Egg: Accutane, the truth that had to be told”
- Follow me on goodreads
E. Clarke Ross, CEO of the patient advocate organization Children and Adults with Adult Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (CHADD), wrote a rather lame response to a criticism today in a USA Today editorial regarding the Multimodal Treatment Study for Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Study (MTA) of ritalin versus psychotherapy for the treatment of childhood ADHD, which as I previously wrote on this site did not show that ritalin was more effective than psychotherapy after three years.
USA Today appropriately points out that maybe parents, doctors, and especially, teachers, shouldn’t be rushing to medicate kids who space out in class when they don’t fully appreciate the potential side effects, and when they, well, basically stop working after a couple of years.
The frought conflicts of interest of CHADD have been pointed out in the book Selling Sickness by Ray Moynihan and his co-author, and I recommend it to add to your pile of recent books documenting how the pharmaceutical industry has corrupted academic medicine (willingly on their part! Come on in guys the waters fine!) and the American medical system.
Ross writes:
It would be a mistake for parents to use the latest data from the MTA study as a reason to retreat from using proven treatments, including medication and structured behavioral interventions, for the disorder.
I mean come on, buddy. The MTA study was not designed to show that all treatments work well. It was designed to compare medication to behavioral treatment and treatment as usual. The study findings were that after three years medications were not better than either of the other two approaches.
I am psychiatrist with a son who was diagnosed with ADD and treated with ritalin. I never heard that there were useful behavioral treatments until… last week. If I got nothing but meds meds meds I am sure that most other people got the same.
Also, some of Mr. Ross’ arguments are at best lame and at worse false. He states that the follow was “after the end of the study.” What he means is that it was after the double blind phase of the study was over. However as far as we can tell the three year followup was also “part of the study”, not just some afterthought like he implies.
He also makes the argument that “lack of access to health care” might explain the lack of a difference between groups. However they measured how many kids were taking stimulants at three years, and 3/4 of the group originally treated with stimulants were still on them, while less than half of the psychotherapy treated group were, so this argument doesn’t wash.
Recently Senator Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) has asked another patient advocacy group, the National Association of the Mentally Ill (NAMI) to disclose payments from pharmaceutical companies. I used to be on the Scientific Advisory Board of a patient advocacy group in the area of anxiety disorders, and I asked them how much of their funding came from drugs companies. I never got a clear answer, so I sort of faded away from that group.
Patient advocacy groups and organizations like the American Heart Association (AHA) and the Osteoporosis Foundation of America are heavily funded by drug companies, and their “screen and identify” programs fit in with the drug companies agenda to expand their markets to the worried well, as well as providing a convenient front. It is time to take a careful look at these organizations and determine if they are doing more harm than good.
If you enjoyed this article, please consider sharing it!
Mom Blogs – Blogs for Moms…
…
Did you know that patient reps on FDA advisory committees are required to be active in a patient advocacy group related to their particular disease (or their family member’s disease)? I was thinking of applying to be a patient rep but I guess that’s out because I am not active in “patient advocacy.”
Oh boy, I’m deeply disappointed with your read on this, Dr. B.
The bottom line on these MTA findings: When the person stops taking the medication, they stop working. Moreover, when people stop receiving medication according to best-practices protocol and start relying on “community care” (meaning the average physician in their health plan), results plummet. This is not an earth-shattering finding. It’s what anyone who knows about ADHD already knows!
We’ve always known that the stimulants work sort of like insulin — or eyeglasses. When you stop using them, they stop working! This is not brain science. This is logic.
As for CHADD, I’m a little fedup with the academic party line on the purported conflict of interest. Do any of the critics actually know CHADD? Have they been to a meeting in their communities or to one of the conferences? Can they truly know that the small percentage of pharmaceutical company funding influences their programs or policy?
No, it’s nothing more than simplistic thinking to assume that pharmaceutical donations influence CHADD’s policies. If these critics want to play at being “gotcha” journalists who follow the money, they should do a little more research. Fairness, not to mention critical thinking and high patient care standards, demands it.
How come these critics never look at the other, more substantial donations — those coming from individuals who have been helped by CHADD when every other segment of our alleged mental healthcare system let them down? That includes therapists who don’t know a neuron from a moron, psychiatrists who wouldn’t know a best-practices protocol if it jumped out their pharma-lunch-provided plate, and a newsmedia that often proves more anti-science than the creationists.
Yes, I agree. It is time to take a careful look at these organizations. I’ve been saying the same thing about the AHA and the others. But I have taken a careful look at CHADD, and I suggest the others do the same before slandering their name and their work. CHADD helps many people, at no cost, and their information is solidly based in the science. They offer advocacy and support that is available nowhere else.
I’ve just returned from the UK, where I was asked to speak at a conference about ADHD. Europe and the UK are years behind the US in treating ADHD.
Coincidentally, organizations that serve the ADHD community overseas have almost no pharma funding. Why is this? Because the NHS has made sure that this is not allowed. And why would that be? Presumably because then they would have to start treating ADHD — an expense they’d rather overlook.
It is very easy to criticize Big Pharma’s marketing practices. They’re appalling. But better you should all focus on what dupes too many physicians are in accepting, unthinkingly, what is dished out by marketing reps with appealing cleavage.
The science is there — and so are the sometimes miraculous results from these medications. What we need are more physicians who can actually read the literature, listen to patients, track results, and learn. Given the difficulty we have in getting some hospital docs to wash their hands, I’m not holding my breath.
Enough with blaming Big Pharma for our medical ills. It’s nothing but a handy scapegoat for bad doctoring. Let’s start examining the physicians themselves — their lack of self-monitoring and self-regulation and perhaps their education. Clearly, something is wrong either with the selection process or the educational process, or both.
“I am psychiatrist with a son who was diagnosed with ADD and treated with ritalin. I never heard that there were useful behavioral treatments until… last week. If I got nothing but meds meds meds I am sure that most other people got the same.”
—–
Surely you did your research before giving your child medication? Surely you tried other strategies? How did they work? Why did you resort to medication? Were two physicians helpless in your decision-making? I don’t understand this victim stance. The medication actually helped, didn’t it? That’s what you say in your book.
As for behavioral strategies working, that is a very muddy picture. And they often involve intense, intense structuring and scaffolding — the kind that can hardly be kept up over time and often don’t prove helpful in other areas (such as making/keeping friends, having muscle coordination, etc.). And for some children, they don’t work at all.
Many children have been short-changed by this reliance on behavioral strategies. Moreover, they often fail miserably when they must provide their own structure, such as when they go off to college only to drop out.
Please, Dr. B. Show some more responsibility here in your information.
ADHD is a biologically-based disorder just like diabetes. Both are caused by chemical imbalances. One happens in the brain, the other in the pancreas. ADHD shouldn’t be thought of or treated any differently than any other type of physical disorder. Medications can help disorders if used properly and determined by a qualified doctor.
The brain is part of the body. It can be affected by disorders that can’t be seen or easily understood, just as any other part of the body can.
The effects of ADHD can be compared to a brain tumor, or Alzheimer’s. Both directly affect behavior and can vary in intensity at different times, for no apparent reason. But these can be controlled with the proper medication and behavior modification of a qualified, science-based doctor.
We must EXPECT doctors to be kept informed and not years behind the research. I find it disappointing, but not uncommon, that even psychiatrist’s don’t have access to proper information!!!
CHADD provides up-to-date, science-based information for FREE.
We must learn to treat those affected by any mental impairment with the same care and compassion we give to those dealing with any other physical problems. Not bashing those that are there to help.
We must also acknowledge, accept, and deal with the effects this disorder has on children, adults and everyone around them. We can do this for people whose lives are turned upside down by a physical illness such as cancer, why can’t we do it for someone with a mental impairment?
Enough already — usually people who are “sick” get lots of support when they share the “news” with others about their “affliction” — people tend to be sympathetic and want to be helpful. People and DOCTOR’S seek out the latest up-to-date information on physical afflictions but most often are light years behind with mental afflictions and not just ADHD. Why?
Instead with ADHD there is bashing, false non-science-based advise, fearful statements about taking medication for the mental impairment, minimization, and even hurtful comments!
This can leave people embarrassed, confused and/or ashamed and not receiving the treatment that so justly deserve — as if their predicament could have been prevented.
Our society has a long history of supporting the idea that mental impairments are something to be ashamed of and deny and NOT take medication for. People expect that those afflicted should be able to control their behavior and moods without medication to balance their chemical imbalances somehow on their own. As a result, most people are extremely uneducated about mental impairments. As a psychiatrist you should be seeing to it that these misconceptions stop. It is time YOU take a careful look at the lack of an education you have provided yourself and as the parent of an ADHD child you owe it to your child to become better educated by sources like CHADD.
No one forces anyone to take medications, not for cancer, not for diabetes, not for organ transplants. I am very grateful for all the research organizations, including pharmaceutical companies, and what they have done to determine what works and what doesn’t.
Regarding “National Alliance on Mental Illness”:
They solicited me to be a speaker following my recovery from a “breakdown”. This is the formula they want followed by speakers:
“1. I was mentally ill.
2. I was given psych drugs.
3. As a result of being on psych drugs I now live a happy mentally-healthy life (free of the aforementioned mental illness).”
They have several days of workshops to coach the speakers on the formula of presentation.
I had life-stresses before my breakdown, but not a history of mental illness. With my psychiatrist’s urging I went off psych meds and THEN I lived a happy healthy life. They were NOT interested. It HAD to be DRUGS=SUCCESS.
Dr. B., as a result of this study, did you take your son off Ritalin, and if so, what was the result?
He was treated with pretty much everything and has been off for over a year and doing well. I don’t agree with our pediatrician that ADD is a “permanent” condition (take a look at the MTA trial data, honey). I had a dream about her the other night where she was trying to convince me my son had diabetes when his blood sugar was 85. I looked up some of Pelham’s comments and disagree that because while on ritalin: 1) lost dazzle must be overmedicated; 2) developed tics, has Tourette’s. Stimulants have been known for years to inhibit growth and behavior. It is obvious that in the short term they help many kids focus better. The question is the long term effects. The authors of the MTA study were obviously overconfident that there would be lasting effects. They should have done three years of placebo controlled design. However, it is their study design, they have to live with it. Shame on them for trying to spin this as a positive study for meds three years ago. I guess they couldn’t keep up that fiction for ever.
You are wrong, Dr. B. Flat-out wrong. I ask you to please learn more about this study and not fall for the critics’ misinterpretations.
The stimulants are about much more than focusing. And ADHD is actually more impairing in adults than it is in children, because it affects so many more domains of life.
Plenty of PhDs and MDs have undetected ADHD; it’s not just about schoolwork.
You are wrong about the MTA study, Dr. B. Flat-out wrong. I ask you to please learn more about it and not fall for the critics’ misinterpretations.
The stimulants are about much more than focusing. And ADHD is actually more impairing in adults than it is in children, because it affects so many more domains of life.
Plenty of PhDs and MDs have undetected ADHD; it’s not just about schoolwork.
As for your pediatrician, why would you trust her word that it is a permanent condition? The research thus far indicates that 30% of children diagnosed with ADHD do outgrow it.
Once again, the literature exists, the science exists. What doesn’t exist is uniformly well-informed care providers who also follow best-practices protocols. Hence this backlash against the medications and the diagnosis itself. I blame the physicians who are too lazy and arrogant to do the work.
Granted, treating ADHD is seldom easy and is often thankless work; ADHD seldom travels alone, which can complicate medication strategies. And often, the physician is dealing with a parent or two with undetected/untreated ADHD and therefore can impede a child’s progress. But if there weren’t success stories, people like me wouldn’t be so passionate about defending the truth about ADHD. I have absolutely nothing to gain — financially, vocationally, or otherwise. But it’s the right thing to do.
Sounds like Gina B has been drinking the corporate kool-aid! Go Gina! Bo- bama-Bina! Bambolina! Scientific proof? That’s laughable. Stop trying to justify yourself, and just learn to live with the fact that what you’re saying is just theory, not proven fact. Remember, we all know that data and statistics can be skewed, too. It’s all in the marketing and positioning, baby.
Malanka, I suggest you step away from your keyboard for a few days and actually meet people who have ADHD.
Listen to them and see if you can summon up compassion and stretch your mind a tiny bit.
All else is just noise and meanness. There’s no place for that in a civilized society.
Yes, I guess the noise and meanness is why many boys are being medicated today. That’s why school nurses have regularly scheduled “meds dispensing hours”, so that all that noise and meanness goes away. Think about it. A young, developing mind– being eaten away by powerful pharmaceutical products. Creativity and a curious mind are being fed amphetamines– what you used to called “uppers” in the 1960s.
Orwell wrote about a society that would use SOMA to medicate its citizens, young and old. How amazingly true that has become. Why must society seek to destroy a “different” yet unique individual –literally forcing them to conform to the standards that we deem “right”. What is right? Being organized? Being quiet? I can’t recall ever seeing a dumb “ADHD” kid. So why dose them up? Just to keep them quiet, push them on through the education system— don’t rock the boat, don’t bend to help them in other ways. A pill is ALWAYS the solution, and believe me, I have seen it time and again. I guess you could call it personal experience.
If a consenting adult chooses to dose him/herself with amphetamines, that’s great.
However, a parent being forced by the pressures that the pharma industry puts on doctors, schools, teachers and the whole cottage industry built around these pharmaceutical products is a different story.
So, I guess you could say I have some experience with compassion and ADHD. I’ve seen the future and it scares me. I see a drugged out society, but hey, if we’re all producing better, higher quality goods and services while under the influence, then why not????
I can’t really say I care for shills for the Big Pharma industry, mainly because I see our youths’ minds being destroyed and tampered with by these powerful drugs.
Sorry, you obviously don’t know what you’re talking about, Marlanka. Talk to some children with ADHD, while you’re at it. That is, if you care about facts and compassion. It’s pretty clear that doesn’t score high on your agenda, though.
I guess talking to my 8 and 10 year old sons isn’t enough, eh? And one of them was diagnosed with ADHD at age 4. I was pressured to put him on drugs from that age until the age of 8, when we moved. We started at a new school, and my son had finally reached the “age of reason”. Strangely enough, no one has approached us about drugging him, and he’s an honors student. So, compassionate I am. But that’s not really the point here, is it? DRUGGING CHILDREN IS BAD, BAD, BAD.
One story does not a consensus make. Until you talk to children who appreciate the benefits of their medication, you haven’t heard the other side.
“I am psychiatrist… never heard that there were useful behavioral treatments until… last week.”
This strikes me as disingenuous at best, a lie at worst. How can you not have known? You are a psychiatrist, you say. And, gracious, you are the child’s parent. How do you explain your ignorance and incuriosity about your own child’s health and treatment?
Do you expect your own patients to just do whatever you tell them without asking questions or informing themselves, first?
Now, do you know anyone who wears glasses? Do those glasses work, if the correction is done just right? Now, think hard about the next question. When they take off their glasses, do they work?
Even after three years of daily wear, don’t you think they ought to be working by now? Why wear them at all?
Your knowledge of scientific method is lacking, too. The group in the MTA study that received medications not from “community care” were treated quite unlike those relegated to community care; where, presumably, they all ended up after the study was completed. The fact that after a time they looked about like any other kids unmedicated is not evidence of how meds don’t help; but of how the best, responsive care does work, and how inadequate is the everyday care most kids receive.
Please. With whom have you made a deal?
It would be nice if everybody could tone down their rhetoric a little. Thanks so much.
Two months ago I read a blog post titled ‘Unwrapping the sales manure’ (http://jeffsaddmind.com/unwrapping-the-sales-manure-352.htm) which attacks two respected psychiatrists. In my opinion, that post is distasteful at best and malicious at worst. I was really disappointed to see Ms. Pera who is a member of the executive board of CHADD Northern California and Dr. Davenport who has a PhD, both make comments in support of that post. I am an adult trying to manage my ADHD and I find their comments here against Dr. Bremner disturbing.
1201 Alarm Press, the publisher of Ms. Pera’s book says in its website (http://www.1201alarmpress.com) – “Had the 1201 alarm—a warning that the computer’s calculations were off and could not be trusted—not gone off, the lunar module likely would have crash-landed in a field of boulders, and astronauts Buzz Aldrin and Neil Armstrong would have perished. 1201 Alarm Press views this near-catastrophic event as analogous to the human condition called Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), in which the brain is mis-processing information and causing vexing behaviors, but often so subtly that it appears to be functioning normally.” The same narrative is used in a Facebook page of 1201 Alarm Press. Ms. Pera, are you aware that the space history part of the above narrative is actually fictitious?
Hi, I was on medication throughout my childhood and adolescence. I was put through the ringer, on tons of antipsychotics, antidepressants, stimulants, amphetamines, mood stabolizers and benzodiazepines for generalized anxiety disorder and ADD. I was overmedicated compeltely. The antipsychotics really messed me up because I was a teenager when I was on them. I was put on Risperdal, an intense antipsychotic when I was 14. I was put on Abilify later on. Then I was put on seroquel. I was put on more and more meds top the point where I was taking five medications a day. This went on from when I was 7 years old until I fionally got off all my medications cold turkey a year ago and am much better. At age 7 I was medicated and then during my teenage eyars they would add more and more medicatiosn, the antipsychoitcs were the nastiest ones. For awhile I would be on a cocktail consisting of an antipsychotic, an antidepressant, a stimulant, an amphetamine, a mood stbaolizer and a benzodiazepine. Then they would change them around and add more and more. It’s not fair to have been through so many medications when I was a child and teenager. The antipsychotics were the worst. These doctors kept putting a teenager who had anxiety but was not at all psychotic on so many antipsychotics and other meds. It was just awful. I’m much better off medication and much more in reality. There are so many other people who were on antipsychotics as children or teenagers. Doctors give out antipsychotics like candy to adolescents and teenagers now for anxiety, depression, ADD and more. It’s really unfair that so many teenagers and adolescents had to go through this. Stimulants and antidepressants are much safer than these antipsychotics they give out so often. Every antipsychotic just gives these horrible, unbearable side effects and the doctors just encourage you to stay on them. The thing is, all the medication I was on canceled each other out. When you’re on astimulants, amphetamines, antidepressants, antipsychotics, benzodiazepines and anticonvulsants, all of them have the opposite effects on each other so they all reverte affect each other and cancel each other out so it’s as useful as being on nothing at all. Your blog is very insightful and I just thought I’d share my piece.
Dr. B says:
“They should have done three years of placebo controlled design. ”
You might be interested to know why they did not use a control group like that.
It is unethical to not treat people who need treatment.
Sorry I got off topic, I was just having a conversation with someone earlier today who was also on many medications s an adolescent, though not as many as me and we were just talking about this and then I see your blog and I’m not sure where to comment. Having gone through so amyn antipsychotics, antidepressants, stimulants, amphetamines, as well as couple benzodiazepines and anticonvulsants, and taking them blindly during my adolescence and childhood, without knowing any of the side effects, and then finally getting off them and figuring out all the side effects, seeing a blog like this really got out everything. If I had known about this blog ten years ago, it would have saved a lot of trouble. It’s realtl the antipsychotics and antidepressants that have the nasty side effects. The stimulants are fairly safe and fun for recreational use. I’ve been on a ton of medications in every category. The antipsychotics are nasty and have horrible side effects, the antidepressants have bad side effects, but aren’t anywhere near as bad as the antipsychotics, the stimulants are fun for recreational use, but not really helpful for medical use, but the safest of them all. I’ve been on about 30 psyche meds if you combine the antidepressants, antipsychotics, stimulants and other stuff, and while they all caused very awful side effects, it’s a lot safer to put a kid with ADD on a stimulant than an antipsychotic, and a lot of parents seem to do both. Once again, sorry I’m off topic, your blog is jsut insightful and I was just having a conversation with someone on this very topic. I’m also very emotional right now for other reasons, sorry I’m taking it out here. I really should not write messages on the internet when I’m in an emotional state of mind like this.
Princess,
I’m sorry you were put through that experience. I hope you are doing better now.
Marilyn
Princess: I will give you the succinct comment I have made from my other postings on the topic of giving antipsychotics to children. When the FDA advisory committee said that more education was needed for psychiatrists about the use of antipsychotics in children, I wrote, “Here is your medical education. Antipsychotics are approved for treatment of childhood schizophrenia. Otherwise, don’t use them.”
Betsy Davenport said: “Your knowledge of scientific method is lacking, too. The group in the MTA study that received medications not from “community care” were treated quite unlike those relegated to community care; where, presumably, they all ended up after the study was completed.” The design was to treat patients with medication, therapy, combination, or treatment as usual for one year, and then see how they were doing at three years. That was the choice of the investigators to do such a study design. Following up at three years was not an afterthought as implied by the USA Today editorial. They chose the study design, they live with the results. Period.
It is obvious from the paper that those originally treated with meds tended to stay on meds more than those who were not originally treated with meds.
As for the multiple goosings that I am a bad father for not exhaustively examining all of the treatment options for my own son… I am a physican, the son of a physician, I have been taught not to treat my own family members. I went to multiple child psychiatrists, pediatricians etc. In retrospect I would have taken on the responsibility of the treatment on myself.
Ramakant, thanks for the link. I see that Gina spends a lot of time commenting on anything that would state anything negative about pharmacological treatments of ADHD. It is my perception that perhaps she is a) trying to sell her own snake oil (book) and b) is being paid to advertise for the pharma industry. Gina, your writing is lovely- wish it wasn’t wasted on this drivel. I just don’t understand your fascination with the literal “pharmacopia” available out there.
And Marilyn, it is frightening to me to witness the lack of empathy, not to mention true critical thinking (which involves examining all the evidence) among so many “smart” people.
I do not understand the need to make things so much harder for people who suffer enough stigma as it is.
And Dr. B., the idea isn’t to criticize your parenting but to point out that when you write factually incorrect posts like this, your words have power and the ripple out in ways that can hurt people. You have a medical degree. You are a brain expert. So, when you castigate these researchers, CHADD, medications, and everything else, it carries weight.
The result? Vulnerable people are hurt. I can’t imagine that is your intention. Would you want someone to have told your child, when he was benefiting from medication after his parents best attempts to help him with schoolwork failed, that he was a tool of Big Pharma, that he had been brainwashed by the establishment who wanted to “turn boys into girls” or anything else, that he was seeking a “quick fix” from parents who just didn’t want to be parents? No, I don’t think so. But that’s where this kind of talk leads.
Moreover, I’ve had the honor of meeting some of the other MTA investigators (other than the egotistical, selfish Bill Pelham, that is), and I’ve never been so impressed with a group of scientists. Their compassion, their intelligence, and their generosity puts their pot-shotting critics to shame. But it’s not people like this who are loved by the media; the media likes people who make outrageous statements that completely lack nuance and play to their cognitive dissonance.
So, Dr. B., Marilyn, and anyone who wants to criticize the use of medications for people who truly benefit from them and who wants to criticize an organization that has helped so many people whom you will never meet because, presumably, you’re more interested in judging than understanding, please stop and think: Who are you serving? Where is your conscience?
The irony, Dr. B, is that if you had gone to the organization that you so unfairly criticize in your post, you would have gotten very good information on behavioral techniques that would have worked in conjunction with medication. And, you would have gotten educated about the proper use of medications, because so many treating physicians don’t bother; hence so many sad stories, like that from Princess. (If your son was taking Ritalin as of a few years ago, he was taking an outmoded medication, one known for causing unnecessary side effects.)
And Marilyn, I don’t know your goal in the blogosphere. My “fascination” with this topic comes from having a heart and having a mind that can see when people who have suffered, often for many years, get the right kind of help, that is a good thing. What more important goal can there be?
The mingy-minded among you automatically assume I am a pharma shill, etc. But you betray your own mindset, not mine. I’ve taken not one cent from pharma or anyone else. My book has been a labor of love, and if you doubt it, ask my accountant. I’ve worked very hard for 8 years to make a dent in ADHD Awareness, because I’ve seen the devastation wrought by both untreated ADHD and a society in denial.
And these days, I’m about ready to decide that the Internet is a lost cause. It is in too many ways the last refuge of the heartless and mindless — even among alleged medical professionals — and that’s too bad because there is such opportunity for enlightenment.
And Princess, please don’t consider the stimulants or any other medication “recreational.” You’re messing with your neurons and your receptors, dear, and that’s not usually a good thing.
Oh geez, my apologies, Marilyn. I misread Marlanka’s name as yours. It’s been a long week.
Readers, please insert “Marlanka” for “Marilyn” in previous post.
And that’s it for me, Marlanka. You’ll have to get your stimulation elsewhere from now on. Sorry!
Having been involuntarily psych-medicated myself, and having found that to be the single most horrible, invasive experience of my life, I side with the folks who err on the side of caution in giving potent meds which affect the brain to kids. I would not give it to my kid.
When a child is under pressure from parents, teachers, physician, psychiatrist and they are ALREADY on a powerful drug, exactly how would these kids manage to have a voice in the matter? They are to speak out against all those in authority when they are being told to take it and not complain? The kids are steamrolled. Everyone around them who is responsible for forcing the drugs on the kid pats themselves on their own backs.
Gina, I think Dr. B has grounds to question medicating kids, and you are so convinced of your own opinion that I doubt you are looking at the situation in an open-minded way. I don’t think you know “the truth” about this issue any more than Dr. B does so I just do not understand the bald “YOU ARE WRONG” statements from you.
I read Gina’s book. I can see that some of the ppl commenting here have not. All the attacks on Gina here, are from these ppl.that have not read Her book, or are just out to attack Her for they’re own satifaction.
The truth is very hard to look at sometimes. Would we be helping our children or ourselves to only do whats easy, and not do the hard things? ….Like read the whole story, and learn the big words?
I find the lack of social awareness on this blog fascinating. I think this would be an ideal time to comment on recent surveys which show that children on medicaid are absurdly more likely to end up on multiple psychotropic medications than children with private insurance. In an ideal world, children would receive both stimulants and behavioral therapy for their ADHD, assuming of course that it is severe enough to adversely impact their social and academic functioning. Unfortunately, many families lack the resources to pursue behavioral therapy. Certainly, the state does not fund it. Most insurances give lip service to paying for behavioral therapy. So what would you suggest be done for a child with severe ADHD who is failing miserable at school and at life? I try and make it a policy to never prescribe psychotropic medications for children without enlisting the services of a specialist in behavioral disorders for the family. Unfortunately, most of the therapists available to children on medicaid are poorly trained and unskilled in evidence based treatments like Cognitive Behavioral Therapy. As for the children who can afford therapy and are severely impaired by their ADHD, many therapists suggest using stimulant medications to get children to the point where they can be worked with. Life is rarely black and white, but I find that this constant harping on the ills of the pharmaceutical industry to be detracting from some important issues. The pharmaceutical industry is more a symptom of a dysfunctional system than a cause of it.
I came up with the same finding… That is that the MTA study is flawed.
After three years on the meds, the meds stop working.
Further there is now ovewheming evidence that amphetamines such as Ritalin and Adderall cause brain damage.