Unfortunately, yes I do.

This post, unlike the ones just simply in denial of the whole AD(H)D existing at all, is hardly something I would disagree with :) You make very good points and present them clearly and politely (more so than I'm capable at times).

Also, I am concerned of misdiagnosis and over subscribing of stimulants (especially for children) that is rampant in some countries (USA being one such place as far as I've come to understand). It's not only damaging to those who are being misdiagnosed but in the long run it may well damage AD(H)D people who find themselves not being able to get treatment easily...

...which is often the case where I live. It's not easy to get an AH(H)D diagnosis and stimulant treatment here in Finland. While we have, generally speaking, a quite good public healthcare system here, I know from my own experience and from what I've heard of other adult AD(H)D people and parents of AD(H)D children, it can sometimes be a real fight to even get you in waiting line to be tested for AD(H)D. I fought from 2003 to 2006 to get there and got diagnosed in 2007 (at age of 27). Still I do think it's better this way than if it were "too easy" to get diagnosis (I'm referring to misdiagnosis problem) - but there's always room for improvement :)

You're suggesting VIRTUAL MACHINES as solution for his problems!? Talk about using dynamite to catch a couple of fishes... And the person you're replying to, he needs to learn reading - TFA is about Chrome OS, not Chrome The Browser running in Windows or whatever other OS. Both of you are stupid.

There is no "massive change" in percentage of people with ADD/ADHD though, it just was previously not understood. I can sympathesize with you though as you come from diseased culture where over- and mis- diagnosing AD(H)D is the norm (wtf is that shit about "pat close attention..." about? That has nothing to do with methods of diagnosing ADD or ADHD in civilized societies) and adults that are lazy fsck's who do happily accept drugs as substitute for parenting to escape their responsibilities. Sad as it is, your diseased culture (and I make no claims that I live in perfect one) doesn't mean ADD and ADHD are fake diseased - they are very well known and studied. It used to be that people with (real) AD(H)D were diagnosed with MBD, a very general and broad diagnose which covered many back then not understood medical conditions - yet the percentage of people diagnosed with MBD was way way way lower than the percent diagnosed with ADD/ADHD *IN USA* today. The rest of the world is different though.

Also, AD(H)D is not just "kid thing" - I was diagnosed with ADHD at age of 26 (and year 2006).

And "anti-ADHD" people, having ignored actual information and studies about it, lack the knowledge that it's actually physically proven to be caused by irregular functioning of the brains dopamine system. Pardon my france in case the above seems linguistically wrong - personally I blame my ADHD ;)

I can't even pretend to understand your comment but somehow it nevertheless managed to make me chuckle =)

You make a good point that would be hard to disagree with and not look like fool, but going to the other extreme and denying the whole existence of ADD and ADHD (especially in countries where over diagnosing of it is not rampant as it is in USA) would be irresponsible as well.

Actually, no. I presume you are talking about MBD (minimal brain dysfunction)? It's a broad generalized diagnosis that was often the diagnosis for ADD and ADHD people before medical science progressed to know of, understand and diagnose ADD and ADHD. It covered (and still covers?) many other medical conditions that were not fully understood back then.

I so wish I had mod points :)

Ignorance is a bliss. ADD and ADHD can actually be physically shown as disorder of the brains dopamine system - but you wouldn't know that since you haven't actually studied any real information about ADD/ADHD as it's easier to hold on to your pre-determined opinions when you have no facts to confuse you.

Also, that ADD/ADHD is a "children issue" only is something that makes me angry. I was diagnosed with ADHD at age of 26. Since I've started with medication my life, in certain areas has become much easier - some would say much more "normal", but I like to avoid that term. I was finally able to get through education on IT field - something people like you claimed I had problems only because of lack of motivation. They say that lack of motivation was the reason I couldn't pass a 3-year education even though I tried for 5-years, and they happily miss seeing anything illogical in their statement.

I do sometimes wonder how different my life had been if ADD/ADHD had been known when I was a kid. For sure I would have avoided many problems with school as well as with other problems I made my family go through... Child services tried to find ways to help me and my family, but they didn't know about ADHD back then, so the reasons behind my misbehaviours remained mystery.

May I presume you are a US citizen? I apologize if I'm wrong... However if I'm right then I have less problems understanding how, no matter how ignorant and irrational, you have come to your conclusions. It is true that medical industry is milking this thing - and USA is the leader in over-diagnosing of ADD/ADHD. Still, just like with chronic depression, the fact that some doctors are over diagnosing a medical condition and the fact that pharmaceutical companies are always more than willing to milk such errors to the maximum does not mean that said medical condition is false. Also it's logical fallacy to say that because a condition had not been known before a time, it didn't thus exists before said time.

If I said to my son "you can play any games you want", I certainly would not mean (and he certainly wouldn't think I meant) that I will buy him any games he wants. He would still have to buy, pirate (or download, if it's free), or otherwise acquire the games by himself - or talk me into buying the game for him (it's not like I won't ever give him anything for free. but that promise isn't promise to give any game(s) to the kid for free).

That's a tough story man... Keep it up (getting better that is), I for one wish the best for you *thumbs up*

You have two individual drugs and a group called "drugs" (which I assume doesn't include the two other drugs you mention). You see anything wrong in that?

Hardly - I guess you haven't actually participated in much arguments around these things.

Comparisons between these three are sometimes made by medical professionals. I would include at least meth though, but heroin, alcohol and tobacco are quite often referred to as the top hard drugs.

Now tobacco has at least the same addiction potential as heroin. And if talking of purely pharmaceutical effects of the substances, tobacco far outweighs heroin. It also seems less people seem able to quit tobacco than heroin. So even if we count the health effects of heroin that have more to do with it's legal status and poverty, tobacco could still have more chance of killing you.

Alcohol - not potentially as addictive but certainly, if you get addicted to it, far more damaging to your mental and physical health than heroin ever could be. Heck, some former addicts (and I've even known some) are in better shape after years of daily use than former alcoholics, who have the same length of use behind them - for one reason because alcohol is *neurotoxic*. It's toxic for your brain, and it's toxic for your organs.

Heroin isn't. That can't be said for all opioids, in fact there are some that are very toxic to your body, but mostly the commonly used ones are not. Read into it, you may find it surprising.

You can use any drug and not be addicted. Yes, even heroin, though I would not suggest to try your luck. But yes, the addiction potential of alcohol, for most people, is much lower than for heroin.

True. It will most likely of these three cause addiction though and it most likely will kill you if you get addicted to it (provided you don't die on something else before).

Those people in country (countries?) - was it Switzerland? - in the "treatment" where pure heroin is given freely to addicts who have failed rehab, are not likely to die because of their habit anymore (now that they are out of need for street heroin, make money - mostly illegally - to finance their habit and can actually be beneficial, not just cost to society).

Because it's not heroin, the substance itself, that causes their health problems and most of their inability to cope with normal life.

In fact that program started out of a test on "hopeless cases", group of heroinists who had failed enough rehab attempts to be categorized "hopeless". The program surprisingly showed that not only, as expected, the people didn't have to finance their habit with crimes and their health improved, but also many of them got hang of their lives, got a job, etc. - and even, after all this improvement, volunteered for rehab - which surprisingly many of these hopeless people now succeeded in. Look into it.

There is a world of differences - they are mostly different than most average people who haven't studied the subject think.

Whether you think that drunks should get the same treatment as "druggies" (which they too in fact are) or the other way around, that's a problem with ill designed system.

It seems to be the trend of the times though :(