John H. wrote:
> "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
>> much
>>>>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
> problem.
I do not believe that the physiological effect is determined by whether
the individual has ADHD or not, since the response to the medication is
the same regardless. I believe that Volkow addressed this.
>>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
>> West
>>>>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
> generalisation.
Are you aware of the Multi-modal study?
