fell_spamtrap_in at ozemail.com.au
Wed May 28 00:11:23 EST 2003
"Mark Probert" <markprobert at lumbercartel.com> wrote in message
news:AhQAa.6043$Ah3.1900711 at news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net...
> John H. wrote:
> > However, keep in mind that IF ADHD is about loss of dopamine volume in
> > synaptic cleft (studies by Volkow on Ritalin impact on DAT tend to
> > this), then the toxicity would not be a problem because it is the MAO
> > degradation of Da that creates the toxic quinones. IF in ADHD this is
> > problem, then the drug is simply restoring synaptic Da to functional
> > rather than creating dangerous excesses that occur with amphetamine
> > Also, if toxicity is occurring then the long term administration would
> > leaving disastrous results that could not be hidden, not even by the
> > aggressive drug company.
> > Having said that, personally I still have reservations about the current
> > treatment or more pertinently diagnosis of ADHD. Eg. Recently a friend
> > mine took her daughter to a pediatrician who advised (after 5 bloody
> > the arrogant shithead) that her daughter has ADHD.
> Generalization from one occurrence is never a good idea.
> The Surgeon Genral's 1999 or 2000 report on psychaitric problems
> addressed the over/under diagnosis issue, and it cam edown on the side
> of underdiagnosis. There is ample evidence that incorrect diagnosis is
> occurring, but, when I took a look at the ADHD-diagnosis picture from a
> broad point of view over more than a decade, I came to the conclusion
> that there is substantial undrdiagnosis, especially of younger ADD
> girls. I recall recent studies which back this up.
Someone ought to diagnoze you!
If you are lucky it won't be me who does it!
More information about the Neur-sci