That's what happens when you live your life on speed.
With apologies if I've misunderstood your intent, but what you said came across as quite condescending, and that's being generous.
In any case, for some of us it is the only way we can live at all, and without becoming outcasts at the fringes of society as used to be the case. To some extent we still are, as witness by many trying to hide their problems, not rarely because of the (apparent) intent and position you express in you comment. Yes it's a drug for many, for me it's a necessary evil. It's a locked and completely boarded up door becoming only locked with a rather shitty lock.
Our problems might not appear real to you, or it might be that you think chemistry is the wrong solution, it's hard to know from your comment, but I can assure you that while I would love to be without my chemical 'wheelchair', it's not realistic. Being able to be a decent father, keep a job, and tons of other things simply wasn't possible. I tried so hard I completely burned myself to the ground, while really only trying to do the things others take for granted. Like doing dishes.
If you call being allowed a decent life is being 'on speed', then by all means call it that. But understand that it's no different than throwing slurs at the quadriplegic, the blind, the deaf or the dyslexic.
In a different world I might not have needed my medication, who knows ? But as I can't change the world completely in my lifetime, I have to change myself, at significant risk.
It seems that you're implying that someone using Adderall should be stigmatized because they're taking medication to improve a deficiency in their brain's biochemical systems...Are you?
Sure you can. Desoxyn, Ritalin, and all the others work about the same, and have largely the same side effects. The only reason Methamphetamine is preferred over Amphetamine (i.e. Adderall) for recreational use is that Methamphetamine is much easier for an illicit drug kitchen to cook up from extracted ephedrine.
When amphetamine was more widely available supply side as an antidepressant and prescribed by general physicians as a placebo in the same way that SSRI's commonly are today, the vast majority of illegal amphetamine products seized by police had a pharmaceutical origin. Addicts can't tell the difference between the various drugs in this class. (http://theinfluence.org/neuroscientist-meth-is-virtually-ide...)
That having been said, like all things related to the drug war there's a lot of fighting and bickering and double think involved here. People are scared of these drugs because of their narcotic potential, and the frightening effects they have at medically inadvisable doses. They seem safer than some of the other commonly prescribed pseudo-narcotics like painkillers or benzodiazepines.
Disclaimer: I take Adderall.
Desoxyn? I didn't realize it was still prescribed, given the profoundly negative effect it has when used recreationally (esp when homemade). Meth terrifies me, honestly, because it has such a wide-reaching range of effects on the body compared to amphetamine.
I never got the "easier" part. My understanding is that it's not difficult to get a prescription for Adderall if one "studies" for the appointment, and it's certainly a lot cheaper. And less likely to ruin one's life.
Pretty much every drug in this class can do that.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stimulant_psychosis
The more you take (acutely, not chronically) the closer the probability gets to one that you'll develop psychotic symptoms.
>Desoxyn? I didn't realize it was still prescribed
I've met at least one person in the last two years who had a prescription for it. In their case it was for severe narcoleptic symptoms, they slept 14 hours a day without it.
>I never got the "easier" part. My understanding is that it's not difficult to get a prescription for Adderall if one "studies" for the appointment, and it's certainly a lot cheaper. And less likely to ruin one's life.
If you're a middle class white person, sure. But for people who don't have the advantage of being pretty or well educated or come from a stigmatized minority class, interactions with doctors where pharmaceutical prescriptions are involved generally get written off as drug seeking. (Of course, that's what it is right?)
Perhaps op was suggesting that, generally speaking, regulated sellers don't call those drugs speed. I would argue that because 'the dose makes the poison' is probably the biggest factor here, buying from a regulated seller is a really good idea, and is probably going to make more difference than which particular drug in this class you choose, just because my perception is that the quality control of unregulated sellers is such that the actual amount of the drug you are getting is going to vary a lot, which makes maintaining a therapeutic dose rather difficult.
Also, while they are all broadly similar drugs, little changes in chemical structure can make a rather large difference when trying for cognitive enhancement. This is a very complex thing. I mean, these are all in the same class of drugs, sure, they are broadly similar, but they are not the same. methamphetamine metabolizes to amphetamine, for example. From talking to both patients and doctors, at least for the treatment of ADHD? it is quite common for one of those drugs to work, while the others don't help a particular patient at all. In my own case, methylphenidate seems to work at child-sized dosages, while amphetamine doesn't seem to help focus much at all.
>Addicts can't tell the difference between the various drugs in this class. (http://theinfluence.org/neuroscientist-meth-is-virtually-ide...)
First, the link claims to have tested methamphetamine vs amphetamine; it did not claim to test methylphenidate. (as a side note, my own experiences line up with the conventional medical wisdom that methylphenidate is significantly less euphoric than amphetamine. I haven't tried methamphetamine) - next, the 'addicts choice' test might go to addictiveness, but even if they are similarly addictive, it doesn't at all address the concerns about neurotoxicity.
Now, I'm no doctor; I don't know if the claims of methamphetamine neurotoxicity are true or not, or if they are true or not at dosages one might reasonably use to enhance cognitive function (which is a rather different question) but... the neurotoxicity concerns are one of the larger differences between amphetamine and methamphetamine, and in my mind, one of the stronger reasons to choose the former over the latter.
I've been told the same thing about meth's neurotoxicity, and that the major difference between the two drugs is that amphetamine is slightly neurally beneficial and methamphetamine is slightly neurotoxic at therapeutic doses.[0] I figure any neurotoxicity involved has to be slight enough for Desoxyn to stay out of Schedule I in the US. As a counterpoint, there's evidence that points to brain damage from antipsychotics and those are still definitely prescribed with regularity. (http://www.psychiatrictimes.com/articles/antipsychotics-and-...)
Of course, to my knowledge there's no real therapeutic replacement for antipsychotics whereas if methamphetamine was doing significant damage to patients it could almost always be swapped out for a safer drug. (Not to mention that methamphetamine was invented in the east and amphetamine in the west, so historically amphetamine has always been more popular than meth in western medicine to begin with.)
[0]: A quick check of wikipedia corroborates.
As somebody who also takes legally prescribed Adderall myself (begrudgingly...I've been on a years-long hunt for practical counseling/coaching help w/ focus), I think it's important not to kid ourselves - we are consuming amphetamines. Uppers. Speed. Greenies. Apart from the assurance of purity, the drug isn't magically safe or without other pleasurable/terrible effects because prescribed by a doctor.
Also would like to add: the "brain biochemical deficiency" theory has been called into question for ADD (and other mental health diagnoses).
http://psychcentral.com/news/2013/11/02/chemical-imbalance-i...