in reply to Sarah Brown

Using speed to treat ADHD always seemed a bit of a grift and prescribers are usually FAR too lazy (or overstressed/worked) to figure out HOW to use the drug. Here. Prescribed. Take. Daily. Bye!

Wrong. How to use it episodically while limiting the addiction risk (but NOT eliminating it) MIGHT find a better use for the drug but that is also difficult for the person using to navigate.

There's gotta be better than this shit. (And should be accompanied by ENDING the bullshit "war on drugs" so we can use the funds to FULLY fund health care).

Sorry, gotta bomb Iran.

in reply to neoluddite

Hmm....speed CAN be addictive--but again, I'm saying we need better treatments or alternatives for those who find it problematic. That does NOT mean I think it should be eliminated as an option but AS an option, more exploration in how best to use it. Sounds to me like you use it more when you need it and then other days, forget to. Some will need it daily; others not but the standard is just to take it every day.

So I'm saying we need more study and effort around NEW treatments as well as studies on how it is used.

I am not against drugs of any kind. Indeed, I find low doses of psychedelics extremely effective. A 'mezzo' dose every few weeks is what works for me.

This entry was edited (2 days ago)
in reply to Sarah Brown

@neoluddite Please don't feel that I'm threatening that or suggesting you or anyone NOT use it! My apologies to you if that came across.

It works for you and for many, indeed. I am not arguing that. But it does NOT work for everyone and so we need better alternatives and/or perhaps better WAYS of using it studied.

At the same time, I am sorry if my commentary began to sound like I'm stigmatizing anyone for using it! Carry on and be well!

in reply to Sister Lucy Fur

@Sister Lucy Fur @neoluddite this seems like a weird hill to die on.

It is known to work for 80-90% of the people it treats, which is a proportion many medications can never hope to reach, and with more efficacy than any other psychiatric medicine.

And a lot of the remainder it works for with less efficacy, and a smaller number of them don’t actually have ADHD and are misdiagnosed by a clinician who thinks it’s “phone scrolling disease”.

I mean, it’s up there with ibuprofen and paracetamol for efficacy.

Why THIS medicine in particular, when we are already stigmatised for taking it by many?

in reply to Sarah Brown

in reply to Sister Lucy Fur

@neoluddite There's also this non-stim drug that has fewer adverse events and similar efficacy, centanafadine. Though it's early days and non-industry studies will be needed.

i notice they did NOT have an amphetamine/dextroamphetamine comparator arm:
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/391327…

General info:
additudemag.com/centanafadine-…

in reply to Sarah Brown

i've recently started taking stimulants for AuDHD and experienced an initial swell of productivity. that has since subsided dramtically. i now feel mentally 'stable,' and am grateful for that condition and hope it persists. but, i often crave the empowering sense of energy and enthusiasm i first experienced on the meds.

i have expressed this to my provider, but was clear that i don't want to modify anything at the moment, because, while i believe that i 'function better' in a higher state of arousal, i don't want to risk upsetting the sense of 'stability' i'm now enjoying.

your comments about masking and burnout were eye-opening. i have felt some external pressure to contiue to be as motivated and productive as when i first began treatment. i will monitor myself to ensure i am not over-masking or risking burnout. thank you.

This entry was edited (3 days ago)
in reply to Дими́трий

@Дими́трий yeah. My experience after a year is that the mental stability effects remain.

The initial drive? That’s a one and only deal I think. Kinda like a special into promo.

Then you get used to it and realise that even neurotypical people can find mundane things boring.

They just don’t mean what we do when we say “boring”.

Дими́трий reshared this.