ADD was created?

Post Reply New Topic

You are just making paranoid assumptions. If you think the data was manipulated as part of some vast conspiracy it's no use arguing with you because you are beyond reason.

My response didn't imply anything of the sort. It IS structural, people with ADD have to put more effort into trying to concentrate, and thus there is increased blood flow to the brain to bring more oxygen and glucose to the hard-working neurons, that's not a "transient difference," that an essential difference in the functioning of the brain with regard to attention.

... I really did believe that you read all of the previous posts and were defending Yupa's opinion that Twoshots was clearly referring to. ...

The point was that the difference shown in the images does show a transient situation, and not a structural one, even if the increased activity it's likely to occur more frequently in peple with AD. The increased activity may (or may not) be the result of a structural difference, but that structural difference is not show in the images.

After a psych evaluation, school's idea, I knew pharmacology was going to be introduced--it was. He introduced ADHD as part of the inattention problem and how it could be treated quite well with a stimulant and how this could also help with friends too. Whatever he's selling, I'm not buying it.

ADHD might exist, but you can keep your stimulant meds. I like my son just the way he is thank you. I'm not about to drug him up so he can be too zoned out to know what hit him.

So, you're telling me he can make friends if he takes a drug? Come on! It seems too simplified. How will he ever learn strategies for social situations or attending to the task at hand? I don't want a robot. My son has grown tremendously in leaps and bounds since he was small. I'm mortified how parents drug their kids so they can be A students or more compliant. It seems almost surreal to me--like some sci fi movie--louis lowry's The Giver sums it up pretty well--anyone read?

When I told this particular doctor how I explained to my son all about aspergers because he inssited on knowing what was what and wouldn't accept anything but the truth, he said "Well, you want to be careful and make sure that he knows he's so much more than that."

What a boob.

I talked about it all with my son, even the meds. I am very open with him and feel dishonest if I were doing something, or even speaking about him, behind his back. If some day he has to take meds because he truly can't function (depression or suicidal), then he will agree to it and understand all about it. In other words, he will have a say as to what goes into his body.

equinn

If there's someone in need of definitive removal it's you. You've disqualified yourself from any form of understanding or sympathy. All you can do is become mesmerized by pretty pictures and insult anyone who shows a healthy dose of skepticism and critical thinking.

Duuude. You're probably right on the first sentence. Nonetheless, if you aren't qualified to analyze something, you don't deserve an opinion on it.

BACKGROUND AND METHODS. The cause of childhood hyperactivity (attention deficit-hyperactivity disorder) is unknown. We investigated the hypothesis that cerebral glucose metabolism might differ between normal adults (controls) and adults with histories of hyperactivity in childhood who continued to have symptoms. Each patient was also the biologic parent of a hyperactive child. None of the adults had ever been treated with stimulant medication. To measure cerebral glucose metabolism, we administered 148 to 185 MBq (4 to 5 mCi) of [18F]fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose intravenously to 50 normal adults and 25 hyperactive adults while they performed an auditory-attention task. Images were obtained for 30 minutes with a Scanditronix positron-emission tomograph with a resolution of 5 to 6 mm. Whole-brain and regional rates of glucose metabolism were measured with computer assistance by two trained research assistants, working independently, who were blinded to the subjects' status (control or hyperactive). RESULTS. Global cerebral glucose metabolism was 8.1 percent lower in the adults with hyperactivity than in the normal controls (mean +/- SD, 9.05 +/- 1.20 mg per minute per 100 g vs. 9.85 +/- 1.68 mg per minute per 100 g; P = 0.034). In the adults with hyperactivity, glucose metabolism was significantly reduced, as compared with the values for the controls, in 30 of 60 specific regions of the brain (P less than 0.05). Among the regions of the brain with the greatest reductions in glucose metabolism were the premotor cortex and the superior prefrontal cortex. When the seven women with hyperactivity or the six patients with learning disabilities were omitted from the analysis, the results were similar. CONCLUSIONS. Glucose metabolism, both global and regional, was reduced in adults who had been hyperactive since childhood. The largest reductions were in the premotor cortex and the superior prefrontal cortex--areas earlier shown to be involved in the control of attention and motor activity.

Stop being an idiot, you've no place to make any claims on who's qualified to have an opinion or not. If anyone is not qualified for anything around here, it is you. Now, please go away and don't come back until you've stopped being a jerk.

Now you're just engaging in sophistry.

Again, no real argument but an attack. If you can't see the difference it's your failure, not mine.

Out of curiosity, do you have any real arguments?

Your critique of Odin's interpretation of the image was predicated on...erm... nothing, as far as I can tell, that actually related to the study.

... it's showing that the ADD brain (on the left) has abnormally high blood flow, indicating it is working much harder to focus and to ignore distractions then the normal brain. ...

Do you have any arguments besides insults? None that I've been able to see.

As far as I can see Odin stated that the difference between the two images was from the right one indicating that the brain it was depicting was working harder.

That makes the difference shown in the image a transient one and not a structural one, as you impled. Yes or no?

Do you have any logic to respond with? Or just more BS about alleged qualifications?