Comment by swiley | Hacker News Reader

Comment by swiley | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

After spending 4 years around people high on prescription amphetamines in an engineering school, here’s my impression as someone who was mostly sober: (during the day anyway)

They look (to me) like they just make that effect where some people get hung up on certain classes of ideas way stronger, if it happens to be video games you won’t get anything done but if it happens to be math then you’ll probably get very good grades.

The problem with using them as an adult is that success as an adult has more to do with effective socializing and less to do with ability. People high on these things are the worst to be around. There was one guy I thought I hated the whole time I was in college and he got off this stuff and it turned out he was an awesome person sober! Most of the other people I know who were on the drugs are similar.

I’m not saying amphetamines are bad but there not magic either. Personally I think the psychoactive effects of chocolate and coffee are plenty for most people and it’s all about managing it.

This comment is a non-sequitor to the parent. You appear to be referring to neurotypical people abusing amphetemines ("people high on .."). GP is referring to using a prescription to manage an actual disorder.

They're not the same thing, at all. Please do not commit the offense of saying that there's no such thing as ADHD, "everyone has trouble doing ..", etc.

The offense is when we drug kids for not wanting to sit at a desk, or not wanting to concentrate on something they're not interested in, or not performing under a certain teaching/learning model.

We put kids (and then adults) in the wrong environment and "fix" them with drugs so they conform to it.

Maybe we should change the environment or model instead. Different people thrive in different environments. A good thing, not something to be suppressed. It's a failure of our current time that we try to force "neuroatypical" into typical, instead of embracing this neurodiversity.

The actual offense is making handwavy statements like 'we're drugging kids for not wanting to concentrate on things they're not interested in'. ADHD is not as simple as that. And for people affected by it, even interesting things are often physically impossible to concentrate on - it's incredibly frustrating and a debilitating condition to live with without medication (depending on severity, of course). A different environment wouldn't solve the problem.

Aside from all that, I agree that forcing everyone to conform to the narrow range of 'normal' in general is less than ideal, but since this is the way current society is structured down to its very basis, the idealistic idea of turning that on its head is probably not very helpful to those presently impacted by it.

I don't know much (anything, really) about this so please don't construe my comment as one of any judgement. I'm really just curious to learn more.

A quick search shows that 9.4% of kids are diagnosed with ADHD.[1] (It's also the exact same percentage of total population with diabetes, which society seems to treat as an epidemic [2]) Of those kids, over 60% were on medication. Maybe I'm naive, but that seems like a lot. Do you think there are really that many kids who have "a debilitating condition"? The source lists a "behavior or conduct problem" as the number one reason to be diagnosed. That...seems a little suspect to me at first blush, but again, this isn't something I have much knowledge about.

[1] https://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/adhd/data.html

[2] https://www.diabetes.org/resources/statistics/statistics-abo...

I absolutely think there is a such thing as ADHD and these people were prescribed the medication to manage it. There was one person who I think managed to get a prescription despite being “normal” and I didn’t notice much about him that changed but we also didn’t hang out much after that.

> I absolutely think there is a such thing as ADHD and these people were prescribed the medication to manage it

Then why do you claim they were "high"? No, they're more toward "normal" than they would otherwise be.

Claiming ADHD people are high, while you are "sober" is a pejorative which diminishes the fact that ADHD exists and needs treatment, and is usually intended to embarrass and denigrate those that have it.

Because amphetamines make you high, whether or not they are treating a disorder.

I have ADHD. I have taken quite a few medications for it over my lifetime, as have many of my friends. Clinically indicated amphetamine treatment does not mean the patient will not become high, or that the patient will remain sober.

It is an issue with which anyone taking these sorts of medications will be well acquainted. It's why many folks suffering from ADHD will sometimes not take their medication.

I think swiley is being a bit cheeky by applying the term "high" to those who are officially, medically stimulated. But you may be erring on the other side, giving too much weight to the official narrative that blesses "medical" speed and condemns "street" speed.

The real difference between medical and rec speed is dosage and route of administration. Big doses, taken nasally or intravenously, are abuse; small doses, taken orally, are medication.

But to concur with swiley, speed doesn't magically stop being speed when an ADHD diagnosis and a Trademarked Drug (TM) enter the picture.

I'm not sure what you consider to be "high" on amphetamines. I take 20mg Adderall XR and don't feel high. It is amphetamine, so of course you could take more, or take IR, to get more of a rush. As someone in their late 30's, that personally has little appeal to me and I'm past the stage of my life where I'd desire to use amphetamines for that purpose.

I think it was just an expression he used for effect.

Can you provide a little elaboration on "the worst to be around"? What makes it like that for you?

I don’t know, they’re less self aware and extremely assertive? They’re usually way louder.

I've recently started treatment with lisdexamphetamine and I feel like sometimes there's certainly a sense of being less restricted than when I'm not using it. And sometimes I feel a sense of (maybe unsubstantiated) confidence that I don't have without it.

Sometimes that's for the better, and sometimes it might be for the worse. I also feel very interested in doing good work, and learning more. Which means I'm not the most social person on our team, although I think I'm well enough liked, I'm not after-work friends with that many of them.

The social aspect is probably the most important aspect of success at work (moving up, political support, getting that money etc), but for now I'm really enjoying being able to focus my energy on a task and not get distracted by every little sound,thought or movement happening around me.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com