Anatomy of an Epidemic

One of the questions in this article from Salon asks"

What about stimulants used to treat ADHD. How effective are they?

These stimulants alter behavior in a way that teachers can appreciate. They subdue finger-tapping and disruptive symptoms. But in the 1990s, the National Institute of Mental Health started looking to see if things like Ritalin were benefiting kids with ADHD, and to this day they have no evidence that this drug treatment improves long-term functioning in any domain -- the ADHD symptoms, lower delinquency rates, better performance at school, et cetera. Then the NIMH studied whether these drugs provide a long-term benefit, and they found that after three years, being on medication is actually a marker of deterioration. Some patients’ growth has been stunted, their ADHD symptoms have worsened. William Pelham, from the State University of New York at Buffalo and one of the principal investigators in that study, said, "We need to confess to parents that we’ve found no benefit." None. And we think that with drugs, the benefits should outweigh the risks.

Read the entire article here.

This validates my feelings (and they were only feelings) that there was a better way to treat students with ADHD than drugging them. I remember one student (now a good friend) who used to have a problem with attention. He would drift off into a daydream and stare out the window (and there were other symptoms) - The idea of ritalin was brought up and I suggested instead that we come up with something else. We invented a catch phrase or word for me to use which meant "come on back" The word was "Butterfly" - When I observed him off task or staring into space I would just say Butterfly and he would come back and focus on what we were doing. It worked. He got through the year without drugs and grew out of it.

I used the same technique on other students and while they were sometimes a challenge at least they were not zombies which is what would happen when placed on the drug.