Ephedrine Neurotoxicity

John H. johnh at faraway.xxx
Wed May 28 10:37:15 EST 2003

"Mark Probert" <markprobert at lumbercartel.com> wrote in message
news:ZY%Aa.7929$Ah3.4206954 at news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net...
> John H. wrote:
> > "Mark Probert" <markprobert at lumbercartel.com> wrote in message
> > news:AhQAa.6043$Ah3.1900711 at news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net...
> >
> >>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.
> >
> >
> > Younger girls because they probably manifest ADHD via excessive talking
> > more than excessive activity.
> The ones I am referring to are not hyperactive. They are best
> characterized as the spacey littlegirl who does not pay attention,cannot
> focus, etc.
> Under diagnosis is not the issue here(I never
> > raised that qtn, straw man),
> I was discussing accuracy in diagnosis, and whether the problem is over
> or under. I offered you a reference for showing that the problem is most
> like underdiagnosis. There was no strawman.

Straw man was the implication that I was suggesting over diagnosis. No, my
concern is misdiagnosis. As your comments indicate, this is a problem.

> incorrect diagnosis is potentially very
> > dangerous precisely because of long term neurotoxicity concerns.
> Howver, no long term neurotoxicity has been shown in ADHD treatment. One
> would think that after 10-15 years of increased ADHD awareness and
> treatment, the neurotoxicity would begin to be showing up to some extent.

No, I was referencing the misdiagnosis and potential for neurotoxicity. As
my original post argued, in genuine cases neurotoxicity should not be a

> I do not
> > think paedictricians should be making these decisions,
> The AAP of has excellent diagnositc and treatment protocols which are
> available on their website for review. Since many people, for one reason
> or another, do not have specialists available to them, the pediatrician
> has inherited the task.
> child psychiatrists.
> > Additionally testing needs to move beyond the subjective stage. As the
> > Aus study showed there are many other options available then just
> > prescribing drugs.
> However, the studies show that medication is the best treatment, and
> enhances the response to other treatments. In many cases, medication
> makes the other treatments feasible, when, without it, they would be an
> utter waste of time.

Best treatment for some, I'm simply saying that the "best treatment" is not
always best for any given individual. I agree, where appropriate medication
works wonders. "Best treatment" in itself is close to a dangerous

John H.

More information about the Neur-sci mailing list