ADHD

[greg]

Just a topic if anyone has anything they'd like to share about this.

Will keep it brief... have been suspecting lately, since late last year, that I may have it, although it's probably somewhat on the mild to moderate side. Depending on the online self-assessment it's anywhere between mild and high.

The confusing misconception being that it's only for loud, extraverted people that can't stop talking is what threw me off from bothering to look into it. The more that I read that it's really just a lack of ability to regulate focus. 100 mph or 0 mph, fire or ice, or both at the same time (like Iceland). Not 50 mph most of the time.

ADHD = entirely driven by passion
non-ADHD = more driven by duty

So many more examples of this, but it's really too many things to mention.

There's a theory about it being related to having hunter gatherer genes that never adapted to the farming world that humans developed. Which is fascinating.

Also talked to my teammate yesterday about it, surprisingly he mentioned he has it and is on Adderall.

Anyone with stories or insights that you wanna share?

[Jo498]

My theory is that many forms of it are almost entirely a product of modern media.
(I am wary about genetic explanations for such specific and recent phenomena. First of all, a hunter has to keep very quiet and be patient for a much longer time than a peasant doing arduous but simple and repetitive work, second we had 7000 years to adapt and while I learned 20 years ago that little changed since the palaeolithic, this is mostly rejected now and there are many evolutionary changes during historical time, even within a few centuries, certainly within several millenia.)
I had extremely good focus as a teenager (not as superhuman as musician or great chess players but it was enough for very good tests and grades at a demanding school despite being also quite nervous). But 25 years of computers and internet have made focussing much harder.

[DavidW]

The confusing misconception being that it's only for loud, extraverted people

I've taught many students with ADHD and it is completely uncorrelated with extraversion/introversion.  I have seen many cases in which accommodations (such as having additional time on exams) for ADHD and/or medication greatly improved their ability to function.  As in taking a C student to an A+ student.  Even though you're no longer a student, that should still apply in life in general.  I wouldn't hesitate.  But know that a diagnosis is not rushed, it is done over time and you might not be diagnosed even if you feel that you have ADHD.  There is a common misconception that ADHD is oversubscribed and unneeded meds are pushed onto people.  Psychiatrists know their jobs.

[Holden]

The ADHD bandwagon was one that we started to ride in the late 70s and we are still on board. In my years of teaching I have seen the ADHD label attached to many children where other conditions would have been a more accurate diagnosis. The problem is that the diagnosis tends to be based on anecdotal evidence and maybe a brief observation of the student in the classroom and at home. I have never been consulted in any of these observations yet I'm working with the student for six hours every day.

The "gold standard" for ADHD diagnosis includes a comprehensive clinical history and examination, rating scales, direct behavioral observations, neuropsychological testing, and objective, comparative analysis of different drug effects and this is rarely performed. One obvious test that should be performed before any conclusion about ADHD is arrived at is simple. Food allergies in children can show the same symptoms as ADHD but this is rarely looked at. What is also not looked at is learned behaviours.
The drugs used are not nice and one of the main effects is a loss of appetite.

I could go on but I know from my experience that many children are simply pigeonholed as ADHD without the comprehensive evaluation outlined above and are then subjected to a medical regime which affects their mental state and not necessarily for the better.

[greg]

My theory is that many forms of it are almost entirely a product of modern media.
But 25 years of computers and internet have made focussing much harder.

This is what I've heard before but I'm really doubtful of this theory.

It's like the trans thing, more diagnoses is most likely the result of more awareness, not a sudden increase in trans (or ADHD) people. People have that concept in their mind and noticing matching patterns of behavior and then go see if they have it. People in the past simply didn't try to find out if they had the thing because there either wasn't a label for it, or people didn't value the awareness.

Maybe for some people computers make focusing much harder, but that I think is a different thing.

Before internet (~13 yrs old), but to be more fair, before regular internet usage (~17 yrs old), some things were already there. Finding surroundings boring and zoning out to constantly daydream, not listening to the teacher because I'd rather think about all the guitar scales I was learning, taking hours to fall asleep because I just stumbled on some compelling thoughts that prevented sleep, etc. all back when we didn't have a phone in our pocket, and we had dial-up internet that I used, maybe, like 3-4 hours a week.

I've taught many students with ADHD and it is completely uncorrelated with extraversion/introversion.  I have seen many cases in which accommodations (such as having additional time on exams) for ADHD and/or medication greatly improved their ability to function.  As in taking a C student to an A+ student.  Even though you're no longer a student, that should still apply in life in general.  I wouldn't hesitate.  But know that a diagnosis is not rushed, it is done over time and you might not be diagnosed even if you feel that you have ADHD.  There is a common misconception that ADHD is oversubscribed and unneeded meds are pushed onto people.  Psychiatrists know their jobs.

Interesting. The extra time indeed would help, I've heard of that.

Leaning towards not really getting a diagnosis/medication, despite being curious about it.
But definitely would if I were working a certain type of job- one that is extremely orderly, repetitive, and requires you to react in the moment constantly (The absolute worst job in the world would be working at a call center).
At my current job, dealing with the restlessness that comes with sitting in the same spot all day is pretty easy- I go for walks several times a day, whenever I feel like it. The constant motion is somehow soothing and helps to process all of the many thoughts going on (idk if you've played Mirror's Edge, but playing that game has a similar effect).
The day to day things outside of work don't really cause enough distress to warrant medication. Yeah, I might repeatedly forget to check where I parked at the mall and be walking around the parking like a retard for 30 minutes trying to find my car. But dumb stuff like that isn't really that distressing tbh, just a minor inconvenience to laugh about later.

The drugs used are not nice and one of the main effects is a loss of appetite.

*brain explosion*
ok, so maybe this is why my teammate doesn't eat lunch usually. 
...Now that I remember, I used to have a friend that had ADHD and was Adderall and would always mention how it helped her lose weight. Also she is probably one reason why I mistakenly associated it with extraversion only, as she was quite extraverted.
(also, losing weight is like the opposite direction I'm trying to go, so Adderall doesn't sound like a win IMO lol)

neuropsychological testing

Ahhhh what is involved in this?...

[LKB]

I was going to reply here, but it seems l can't concentrate for long enough to post anything...

[Jo498]

It's not entirely a product of modern media; I wrote "almost" but of course it is also a product of modern education, society and psychology.
(And I would not deny that there might be a 0.01% "genetic"/natural rate like maybe with trans phenomena that increased many thousandfold in the last decades. There are huge differences between these phenomena of course; I am not claiming we can people talk out of having attention deficits. That disorder is real but I sure it is caused to a large extent by overstimulation via electronics on the one hand and too much forced "sitting quietly" on the other hand and a few other factors. And of course there is lots of money to be made by the pharma- and therapeutical industry.)

When I was a kid in 1970s-80s Germany, there were almost no videogames. (I remember well how totally transfixed we were by the first primitive ones we encountered in the mid-1980s when I was already 12-13.) Most parents limited TV time and there was not so much to watch anway with only 3 channels. School was only in the morning and children spent a lot of time playing by themselves, often unsupervised or outside. Or playing sports. Children misbehaving in school were not let off easily (although certainly treated much milder than in my parents or grandparents time). It was not perfect, of course, some children with issues were probably often not treated properly or not early/quickly enough. But there was no epidemic of neuro/psychological maladies effecting almost every other child or so.

(as for the evolutionary "explanation", just explain how a hunter/gatherer could afford to find surroundings boring and zoning in/out daydreams... He ain't catching any food like that, not even berries and mushrooms...)

[MusicTurner]

Some interesting and plausible points given above.

But the diagnosis has become popularized, and percentages having it in Western societies have gone up, sometimes almost doubled, within the recent decade or so (up to 15% of people in some cases).
I think this would also suggest a certain, subjective flexibility within the diagnosis framework itself - extending into what is actually pretty common symptoms or patterns of behaviour in our days. And will the diagnosis exist in 20 years' time? It will likely be revised into something else, perhaps in a more sophisticated or graduated system.

[greg]

That disorder is real but I sure it is caused to a large extent by overstimulation via electronics on the one hand and too much forced "sitting quietly" on the other hand and a few other factors.

Maybe the better word then "caused" is something like "reason for diagnoses?" or the fact that this combination brings it out in plain view more than it did in the past?

It's like, you develop something that a lot of people love so much that they can't get enough of it and want to eat it constantly- let's say, it's called "perfect pizza." But then you forcefeed all of those people eat something they don't like at all, say brussel sprouts- they can't stop complaining, and then wonder why number of complaints about the food being served goes up.

But some people aren't as affected- I still know people that don't game at all, or just haven't been as captivated by gaming. It seems like some people are hardwired for it, others not so much.

School was only in the morning and children spent a lot of time playing by themselves, often unsupervised or outside. Or playing sports.

I've heard that the last ten + years, in elementary schools in the US they are taking away recess, which would only exacerbate the problem.

When I was a kid in 1970s-80s Germany, there were almost no videogames. (I remember well how totally transfixed we were by the first primitive ones we encountered in the mid-1980s when I was already 12-13.)

Ohhh yeah, I remember being in pre-school (early 90's) and seeing Sonic the Hedgehog being played in another room and it was just much more exciting than the stuff going on around me (just talking to other kids, playing with blocks and such, also remember how we weren't allowed to make the blocks into gun shapes lol).
Then we got the system and game at home, was the only one for a while, too. Good times.

(as for the evolutionary "explanation", just explain how a hunter/gatherer could afford to find surroundings boring and zoning in/out daydreams... He ain't catching any food like that, not even berries and mushrooms...)

Yeah, that's a good point and where it gets interesting.
The introversion/extroversion thing really manifests differently into different types of ADHD. The hunter/gatherer type would make sense for the extraverted types, but not the introverted ones.

Now, the introverted type (daydreaming/inattentive), doesn't really make sense for farming or hunting. I feel like that is just something else mixed in with that. Maybe it's like the village's mad scientist or something? lol

But although the mad scientist would probably be the one in charge of either doing weird farming experiments or weird weapon building experiments for hunting, if he could do neither, which would he gravitate towards more, hunting or farming?

So... personally, maybe since I'm not 100% introvert- probably more like 80% or so, it gets a bit complex. Comparing a poor farming village to a poor nomadic tribe- I'd rather be a hunter-gatherer nomad. But if living in the same spot meant an abundance of stuff to own, stuff to do, to where your mind doesn't get bored, I'd rather choose that.
(I sort of recently IRL did choose the latter... but overall the main reason is just because of hobbies, moving so much stuff around is just not a good experience. Overall, the nomadic lifestyle is much more exciting and somewhat painful knowing it will be inaccessible).




btw there's a short wikipedia article on this, interesting read:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunter_versus_farmer_hypothesis#:~:text=This%20hypothesis%20proposes%20that%20ADHD,was%20never%20intended%20to%20be.%22

[greg]

There was some story about Vivaldi running out of church due to some musical idea that he thought of and ran home to write it down.

Probably totally misremembering that, or it didn't happen, etc.

But the idea there... I could totally see that happening. Whatever was going on is less interesting than whatever his brain could think of musically.

Connecting back to the idea of passion, it's like a magnet that activates during circumstances of less amounts of passion.

There is also a connection of poor sleep which we didn't even get into... the idea that ADHD people connect to something (like a passion) to wake them up because whatever is going on around them isn't interesting.

ADHD extraverts getting distracted by something else in their environment as a way to wake them up (talking to others when they shouldn't, fidgeting, etc.) and ADHD introverts getting lost in their thoughts because it's more stimulating than what's going on around them.

Supposedly it's just inability to regulate fluctuating dopamine levels, IIRC, though that might be a rabbithole to investigate further.

[greg]

My currently quick summary of what I think ADHD is (subject to change):

some sort of combination of these three factors:

1) lateral thinking
2) dopamine disregulation
3) sleep issues

When these all come together, then symptoms appear when the subject is forced to focus on something that isn't interesting to them.

in other words, unpacking those three:
1) many thoughts (internal) or things they notice external (which most people can usually filter out) going on which can be hard to prioritize
2) inability to feel any sense of reward apart from internal motivations (aka passion, which doesn't follow rules or schedules)
3) needing some stimulation (external or internal) to prevent from falling asleep

[greg]

(as for the evolutionary "explanation", just explain how a hunter/gatherer could afford to find surroundings boring and zoning in/out daydreams... He ain't catching any food like that, not even berries and mushrooms...)

from wiki:

It is argued that in the hunter-gatherer cultures that preceded farming societies, hunters needed hyperfocus more than gatherers.

To clarify, it's like this: inattentiveness is like scanning the environment, picking up cues of possible food sources.
Finding that source/target is a dopamine trigger, it would trigger hyperfocus, especially for hunters.

So it's not that hunters would remain inattentive once they found their target- they would just shift into hyperfocus mode, something that a farmer brain would be unable to do.

The disregulation is like the 0-100, or fire and ice, that I mentioned previously.

In modern days, it somehow transformed into people that can play video games 16 hours a day (which I have done once, when I had the time).

[Karl Henning]

Some interesting and plausible points given above.

But the diagnosis has become popularized, and percentages having it in Western societies have gone up, sometimes almost doubled, within the recent decade or so (up to 15% of people in some cases).
I think this would also suggest a certain, subjective flexibility within the diagnosis framework itself - extending into what is actually pretty common symptoms or patterns of behaviour in our days. And will the diagnosis exist in 20 years' time? It will likely be revised into something else, perhaps in a more sophisticated or graduated system.

The topic is a ready-made breeding ground for junk science, for which the OP appears to have something of a predilection.

My theory is that many forms of it are almost entirely a product of modern media.
(I am wary about genetic explanations for such specific and recent phenomena. First of all, a hunter has to keep very quiet and be patient for a much longer time than a peasant doing arduous but simple and repetitive work, second we had 7000 years to adapt and while I learned 20 years ago that little changed since the palaeolithic, this is mostly rejected now and there are many evolutionary changes during historical time, even within a few centuries, certainly within several millenia.)
I had extremely good focus as a teenager (not as superhuman as musician or great chess players but it was enough for very good tests and grades at a demanding school despite being also quite nervous). But 25 years of computers and internet have made focussing much harder.

As a teen and a 20-something, I could memorize large swaths of text. Probably most notably the part of Salieri in Peter Shaffer's Amadeus, which I played while at college. On one hand, I kind of doubt I could do that today. On t'other, I perhaps ought to try again (on a modest scale)

[prémont]

I think the OP's argumentation and reasoning is so diffuse and incoherent, that I think he is better served by a psycologist than by casual posters at GMG. So my advise to him would be to see a psycologist.

[greg]

One person who thinks they are the authority on what is and isn't "junk science" and another person who can't recognize the process of someone learning about a topic and making connections. Okay.

Asking questions and trying to see if connections hold up, and relating things together to solidify the concepts is exactly how I did well with computer programming in school and learned music deeply.

If you have a completely different thinking style, maybe recognize that instead, maybe learn the different types.

If you doing know what sensing vs. intuition is, for example, you just won't see it.

Really feels similar to when I would do things out of order at work and got yelled at, even though in the end I'd get the job done. Not everyone does everything in order, but we can still end up learning the same stuff.

[greg]

One thing fascinating is how it comes out in body language.

There is a system that analyzes body language and relates it to the Jungian functions.

Sent a video of me talking to the camera to an online friend who was studying the system and he analyzed it. Later looked at it and compared, seems he is correct.

Out of the 8 Jungian cognitive functions, was typed as Ne as my lead. The nickname for this function is "inattentive."

Would be interesting to have a large scale sample size of this, to see if diagnosed people would have this type. But it seems likely they would, since that system is using cues such as "perkups," "looking through things, not at them," or fidgeting as indicators.

Seems like they are just two concepts that have a strong overlap, and a lot of people have noticed this as well.

[greg]

Saw a video yesterday, one guy with inattentive ADHD who was, IIRC, a biologist or chemist.

He mentioned how his learning style was to just use the book and study when he felt like it, and didn't learn well from instruction since it was hard to focus on lectures. Completely relatable.

The annoying thing on this forum, from a previous discussion, is how people pretend like the only possible learning style to exist is from a professor to lecture you. Imagine them making policy, not accounting for different learning styles, leading to people feeling like they have something wrong with them...

Part of the learning also will be quite random. The epiphanies and connections will be at inappropriate times or weirs times, like in the shower or while taking a walk. They won't be very scheduled or predictable.

It's just weird how in school, the average kid was way slower at grasping concepts, but also way more engaged at the same time. The hardest part of doing homework wasn't the difficulty itself, everything was quite easy,  but the constant zoning out every 5 minutes made it somewhat painful.

[prémont]

The annoying thing on this forum, from a previous discussion, is how people pretend like the only possible learning style to exist is from a professor to lecture you. Imagine them making policy, not accounting for different learning styles, leading to people feeling like they have something wrong with them...

In my case I learned the most by studying at home. But also a lot by attending lectures and discussing with other students, and last but not least by listening to all the oral exams i could manage. At the lectures I never made notes - this would distract me too much from listening. We all have different ways of learning.

[prémont]

One person who thinks they are the authority on what is and isn't "junk science" and another person who can't recognize the process of someone learning about a topic and making connections. Okay.

However, I would warn you against trying to be your own psychologist. Firstly, I doubt that you have the relevant basal education, and secondly, you are not able to assess yourself objectively. None of us can do that.

That was what I meant.

[greg]

However, I would warn you against trying to be your own psychologist. Firstly, I doubt that you have the relevant basal education, and secondly, you are not able to assess yourself objectively. None of us can do that.

That was what I meant.

Ok, interesting topic actually.

Where I agree is when it comes to diagnosis. Especially something like ADHD. I think it's okay to look at patterns and such, that is why people seek out a diagnosis, so it's good to be aware of the patterns. But self diagnosis for ADHD is just not a good idea. I am comfortable with observing the patterns that might point to that for me, because it's interesting, but nothing past that.

Probably one exception I could think of would be something like schizophrenia... seems like something way too obvious and that a self-diagnosis is perfectly fine. Hallucinations just don't happen for people unless they have that, much less regularly. Maybe only in sleep or sensory deprivation situations.

No one can look at others objectively, though- psychology is entirely subjective- it's not a hard science. Psychologists may even disagree on diagnoses. The only objective thing is the physical (brain scans). They won't disagree on something like that if they don't have vision issues. The value of psychologist's observations might be better described as "more informed and experienced," right? Maybe I'm nitpicking your words, though.