resurrected: Amphetamines/Ritalin/Adderral Thread

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
I'm too lazy to read through all these posts but ill share my thoughts on the matter.

For a person who has legitimate diagnosed learning problems ... its fine. Although i feel the diagnostic criteria for something like ADHD is far too lax to begin with. I remember there being cases of nurses writing scripts for ritalin/aderall.

If you are not diagnosed i feel its dishonest and you're just being too lazy to do the work yourself so you're relying on a chemical to get the job done for you. Buckle down and believe in yourself...a pill isn't going to make you any smarter.

Also, I remember from my behavioral pharmacology class that a substance like ritalin if taken by a normal person for a substantial period of time will produce ADHD symptoms in the absence of the drug. However, what that period of time is im not sure. without going and referencing my primer on drug action i can add that ritalin/aderall is pharmacologically similar in may ways to cocaine. I could go into more detail if someone is interested but the book is across the room and m feet are cold. :p

Members don't see this ad.
 
Um... Did you seriously just write that?:confused:
Doctors may be too liberal with ADD diagnosis, I don't know. But I definitely wouldn't say that "the problem with our generation is that we have so much crap distracting us."

You've evidently not met anyone who is ADD. Else you'd know better than to spew ignorance.

Ignorance? The fact that ADHD has been around for over 50 years, but the number of children diagnosed each year has been doubling indicates that there is a SEVERE overdiagnosis of it. If a kid has trouble learning material because his parents don't make him sit down and do it or he just has poor behavior, he is automatically diagnosed with ADHD. I'm not saying it doesn't exist (as I clearly stated in my above post). I'm saying that too many people use it as an excuse to get medication that they don't NEED.

For example, I have a cousin who is also "diagnosed" with ADHD. He apparently can't sit still for 10 mins in class, but can sit in front of a TV and play Xbox for 3 or 4 hours at a time. He seems to concentrate just fine when he is given something that is interesting or challenging to him.

And actually, I am "diagnosed" with ADD. I have just chosen not to medicate myself because if i just eliminated my distractions, I can study just fine. I didn't mean to offend you if you were diagnosed with ADD and are medicated.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
This is an interesting topic. I think that if someone has a just reason (mental disorder) for the use of medications such as Ritalin or Adderall then it’s their right to do so. We aren’t all alike and no one is perfect. What is sad about the whole thing is when people who don't need it, abuse it, and make individuals who really have an illness seem as a joke. There are a lot of people that actually benefit from these medications that do NOT have the same level of dopamine in the brain and therefore do NOT experience the effects that these abusers feel. (Those with the extreme effects usually already have enough dopamine in their system so the release of more just causes them to have these sharp, dramatic responses).

I think what people fail to realize is that nicotine (the active ingredients in cigarettes) is also a stimulant of the CNS. Just as in amphetamines like Adderall, it increases the release of dopamine and has the same effects: increased alertness and elevation of mood amongst other benefits. One of the reasons why we don’t talk about it is because smoking is socially acceptable, yet it is still a drug with high abuse potential (like amphetamines and cocaine) because it acts on the reward system.

How many times have you seen people, leave their work because they can't handle it and need a cigarette to get their mind more focus, to relieve stress? Is that fair for a non-smoker? No. There were times at one of my jobs, when they seem to get more breaks just to go smoke. Remarkable.

Anyway, what we continuously fail to realize is that for these smokers, there is often NO deficit in dopamine in the brain. For those that need medications, there IS a deficit. So what drug may be good for one may not be as good for the other; a smoker only needs a cigarette to produce the stimulatory effects (such as alertness), while someone with ADD/ADHD (who has the deficit) may need just a bit more stimulation to have the same effect of increased attention.

As many of you will be doctors one day, I hope that your experience in medical school and in your residency opens your eyes to what’s going on. It would be very sad if many of you practice medicine with the same views.
 
I used to take adderall in College, and I did really well while I was on it, but every night when I came down I felt like hell, couldn't sleep and got in really bad moods. When I started postbacc I decided that I couldn't live that that anymore and decided never to take it again. I just worked through it and studied really hard and I did better in postbacc than I did in college. It is totally possible to stop taking adderall no matter how long you have been on it.
 
Patekpremed:

"The fact that ADHD has been around for over 50 years, but the number of children diagnosed each year has been doubling indicates that there is a SEVERE overdiagnosis of it."

My reply:

I think that in one way you are right, there is an increased diagnosis of ADD/ADHD. But I also think that one of the reason is because of an AWARENESS as well as an ACCEPTANCE of ADD/ADHD as a valid disorder and the success in its treatment.

Its similar to the higher degree of psychiatric diagnosis (such as post traumatic stress and depression) amongst soldiers when the return from war; there is more awareness and increased diagnosis.

In general also, doctors and researchers have realized that the disorder may not just be present in childrens and teens but may persist into adulthood, which may also influence how parents handle their kids behavior.
 
Should all deviations from the mean neurocognition be labeled a medical disorder? It would seem, then, that there are probably many medical disorders out there that we haven't yet found. We should start looking for them. With luck, we will be able to characterize all the mental disorders that all people have. I wonder how many I have; since they haven't all been found, it's possible that I have several.
 
Should all deviations from the mean neurocognition be labeled a medical disorder? It would seem, then, that there are probably many medical disorders out there that we haven't yet found. We should start looking for them. With luck, we will be able to characterize all the mental disorders that all people have. I wonder how many I have; since they haven't all been found, it's possible that I have several.

Isn't this more or less the bases of psych as it relates to medicine? It's just a matter of defining how much of a deviation constitutes as a disorder. Many cases are clear cut but there is a pretty big grey area in my opinion.
 
Should all deviations from the mean neurocognition be labeled a medical disorder?
This belief comes from the philosophy that you must have a disorder to take psychiatric drugs. The US philosophy is that "drugs are bad unless you're sick", so we've learned to classify ever child who might benifit from Ritalin or Adderol as sick so that they can be perscribed the drug.

This has had a really negative affect on some of my friends. It's not that they didn't see massive grade improvements from the adderol/ritalin, but when they were perscribed the drug they were convinced that they had a disorder. It's almost impossible, after that, to convince them that they're not 'broken'. That there is, in fact, nothing wrong with them and that the most anal retentive validictorian would see an improvement in his grades if he started taking study drugs. It's really pretty sick when you see how it affects someone when they're convinced that they're screwed up in the head.
 
Isn't this more or less the bases of psych as it relates to medicine? It's just a matter of defining how much of a deviation constitutes as a disorder. Many cases are clear cut but there is a pretty big grey area in my opinion.

Actually, I thought about this more. It's a deviation from mean neurocognition that manifests in a problem for the individual, or those that the individuals interact with, given certain established social dynamics of the individual vis-a-vis those he interacts with. It is the negative social ramifications that this deviation manifests in that constitute when he has a disorder. This establishes the recognition of a disorder in an individual as contingent upon his position within a given social order, the social expectations that result, and his violation of these expectations. The origin of the deviation in neurocognition cannot be said to be necessarily essential to the individual but may arise by virtue of his social experience itself.
 
I'm severely allergic to coffee, no joke. So if I want to be like everyone else, and actually get to stay up studying, what can I do? I don't think that Ritalin would be morally wrong.

Except then I think of athletes using performance-enhancing drugs. And that, clearly, we typically call wrong. (As an athlete, I have a particular distaste to people using performance-enhancing drugs.)

But I guess it still feels wrong to say one can use coffee and not Ritalin. It's like saying oh, we don't mind if athletes drug up so long as they do it on X (probably something heavily connected with a big industry :p), and X happens to only be tolerable to, I don't know, people with brown hair :p.

In the ideal world, maybe they should regulate caffeine. But then where would people get their chocolate fix, from decaf chocolate? :p I don't know, maybe this exists. I *am* in favour of widely banning tobacco, which is typically a very unpopular view.... So truth be told, there's a spectrum out there, clearly, of how much people should be allowed to pursue their wants, and nobody will ever agree on this.

Personally, though, as I say, if you allow coffee, allow Ritalin, if only for issues of fairness and having a level playing field. Ritalin has its downsides, too, but coffee's pretty harmful, itself (high blood pressure over long periods of time, etc.).

(P.S. My best friend is like me, too, in this regard, so it's not odd to have an extreme intolerance.)
 
Who the hell needs adderol in undergrad to do well? Medical school, I'd understand (though disagree with), but undergrad? Introduction to Anthropology? I'd re-evaluate myself if I needed it in undergrad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Members don't see this ad :)
It's to be found everywhere at my university, along with inderall and benzodiazapenes to get rid of anxiety and "improve" communication. I'm a pharmacy student at a school where most disease conditions and optimal pharmacotherapies are discussed in the last academic year, so you can imagine everyone feels like sky falling on their heads.

The medication can be of a great help to students who cram, but then again, it is a temporary solution and I am not sure how effective it will be for many things to come, including any possible rotations/fellowships or some other high stress job.

In case you are wondering, what university, I go to USP, University of the Sciences in Philadelphia. Though from what I can tell, it is a much greater problem in neighboring U-Penn, where possible one out of ten kids take the medication illegally.
 
Who the hell needs adderol in undergrad to do well? Medical school, I'd understand (though disagree with), but undergrad? Introduction to Anthropology? I'd re-evaluate myself if I needed it in undergrad.

You can do well without adderall, but you can't procrastinate or have as much free time without it. :thumbup:
 
I rather just have such a life that my books are my only friends....

not exactly...but when stuff gets sucky socially i usually cling to school and learning and doing better

Illegal drugs dont sound good to me. I can even overdo it with caffeine and pushing myself to stay up or work when I need, NEED to go to sleep. Ive pushed my heart, body, and mind pretty far. I prefer the traditional and healthy methods of being alert!

I think the more genuinely interested you are in whatever you are pursuing the easier it becomes. A year ago or so, I was interested in skateboarding AND doing well at school. Now school is def number one and more important. Guys, family, going out, hobbies have all taken a backseat.
 
Shut up. There's a difference between use and abuse. Drug abuse entails specific characteristics that simply do not happen w/ coffee.
If you have drank coffee to the point that it has affected you're normal functioning (i.e. tremors, headaches, loss of concentration, less energy w/o caffiene), then you fulfill the abuse criteria (and the dependence criteria).
 
If you have to take drugs to study, you're a *****.

I guess it's cool if you want to emulate Hunter S. Thompson though.
 
I guess it's cool if you want to emulate Hunter S. Thompson though.

He didn't have to study though, just write. And even then the writing was based on the fact that he was doing drugs.
 
These posts in defense of stimulant use are pretty clever, especially the sports metaphors. It shows a real effort to mitigate the cognitive dissonance many of you are experiencing.

Specifically, you drug defenders are incapable or unwilling to admit that you lack the ability to keep up with true intellects. There are more than enough people who can run this race alone yet you refuse to put in an honest effort or let go of your dreams. It's not honorable. It's pathetic and selfish, but also sad, given how few people get a shot at medical school.

I say, if you cannot tackle your courseload via blunt force studying or through clever planning, then you really should get out of the race. You aren't qualified but I doubt any of you will step away from these delusions.

And that goes for any profession.
 
Last edited:
So would any of you talk about it in your interview or personal statement? I was diagnosed about halfway through college with ADD and was perscribed Adderall for it. It made a huge difference in my GPA and now I am wondering how to explain the difference in my personal statement. I know it is a very controversial subject and don't know if it would be better to mention adderall or just say I made a bunch of changes in my study habits. The jump in grades was pretty significant....mostly Bs and Cs to straight As in upper level courses the rest of the way out. So what do you think, would it help or hurt to mention it?
 
Surprisingly enough, there's a good deal of evidence to suggest that long-term use of the stimulants mentioned above significantly increases one's chances of developing complications due to cardiac abnormalities, including tachycardia, arrhythmia, and even mild hypertrophy and infarct.

See Pub-med ID's:
16924941
18496266
18024065
10461823

Licit or not, one should approach the use of performance-enhancing stimulants should be approached with caution. These aren't aspirin you're popping.
(Not medical advice, simply common sense)
 
So what's the purpose of this thread if talking about personal experiences is off-limits?
 
These posts in defense of stimulant use are pretty clever, especially the sports metaphors. It shows a real effort to mitigate the cognitive dissonance many of you are experiencing.

Specifically, you drug defenders are incapable or unwilling to admit that you lack the ability to keep up with true intellects. There are more than enough people who can run this race alone yet you refuse to put in an honest effort or let go of your dreams. It's not honorable. It's pathetic and selfish, but also sad, given how few people get a shot at medical school.

I say, if you cannot tackle your courseload via blunt force studying or through clever planning, then you really should get out of the race. You aren't qualified but I doubt any of you will step away from these delusions.

And that goes for any profession.

That's a pretty ignorant assumption. As someone diagnosed with ADD and chooses to take medication, your reply is downright offensive. My brain was not designed to sit in a classroom for hours on end and read books or listen to other people lecture but to be engaged in the real world. In the real world (ie not confined to a desk) I am able to accomplish more things at a faster rate than most people I know thanks to very little need to sleep. Having ADD has nothing to do with my intellect, only my ability to optimize it depending on my environment. Put me in a high-stress environment and I'm golden. In fact, many CEOs and higher-ups report that they are diagnosed with ADD. The ironic thing is most attribute part of their success to ADD. School is not the ideal environment for someone with ADD so it's difficult to be at the top of the class. However, put someone with ADD (mild-moderate, may not apply to those with more severe cases) in an environment requiring constant stimulation such as business or medicine and we function better than "normal" brained people. Sitting down and studying or doing any mundane task for long periods is hell without medication but when I'm at work moving around I can accomplish more than my coworkers because I can multitask and work more efficiently. In fact, most people with ADD tend to hyperfocus-so completely focused on something that interests them they tune out the outside world so they get things done if they can learn to apply it. My brain may not be optimal for sitting down and memorizing information so I can get an A on a test and only to forget it all the next day but I've only got a few more years of that. Yes, I will always have to sit down and read things or take boards but for the most part I can place myself in an environment in which I will thrive. The meds give us the ability to excel in a "boring" environment but few of the 'normal' brains can excel in our stimulated environment.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
That's a pretty ignorant assumption. As someone diagnosed with ADD and chooses to take medication, your reply is downright offensive. My brain was not designed to sit in a classroom for hours on end and read books or listen to other people lecture but to be engaged in the real world. In the real world (ie not confined to a desk) I am able to accomplish more things at a faster rate than most people I know thanks to very little need to sleep. Having ADD has nothing to do with my intellect, only my ability to optimize it depending on my environment. Put me in a high-stress environment and I'm golden. In fact, many CEOs and higher-ups report that they are diagnosed with ADD. The ironic thing is most attribute part of their success to ADD. School is not the ideal environment for someone with ADD so it's difficult to be at the top of the class. However, put someone with ADD (mild-moderate, may not apply to those with more severe cases) in an environment requiring constant stimulation such as business or medicine and we function better than "normal" brained people. Sitting down and studying or doing any mundane task for long periods is hell without medication but when I'm at work moving around I can accomplish more than my coworkers because I can multitask and work more efficiently. In fact, most people with ADD tend to hyperfocus-so completely focused on something that interests them they tune out the outside world so they get things done if they can learn to apply it. My brain may not be optimal for sitting down and memorizing information so I can get an A on a test and only to forget it all the next day but I've only got a few more years of that. Yes, I will always have to sit down and read things or take boards but for the most part I can place myself in an environment in which I will thrive. The meds give us the ability to excel in a "boring" environment but few of the 'normal' brains can excel in our stimulated environment.

thats how i feel... I have never been able to sit down and study for more than few minutes, i feel like I always have to be moving around. I'm excellent at multitasking, which is what makes me so good in the pharmacy where I work - I can handle so many tasks at once. You should see some of the pre-pharmacy kids who get into retail pharmacy for the experience and they can't take the pressure... they can sit through 3-hour PCAT study classes just fine but put them in a real-life pharmacy that does 500 scripts within a 8 hour work day and they're cooked.
 
So would any of you talk about it in your interview or personal statement? I was diagnosed about halfway through college with ADD and was perscribed Adderall for it. It made a huge difference in my GPA and now I am wondering how to explain the difference in my personal statement. I know it is a very controversial subject and don't know if it would be better to mention adderall or just say I made a bunch of changes in my study habits. The jump in grades was pretty significant....mostly Bs and Cs to straight As in upper level courses the rest of the way out. So what do you think, would it help or hurt to mention it?

sadly I doubt it would give you any benefit to mention past or current mental illness on a PS or in an interview - even though many people come to medicine after their own experience (good or bad) within the system first.
 
...In fact, most people with ADD tend to hyperfocus-so completely focused on something that interests them they tune out the outside world so they get things done if they can learn to apply it. My brain may not be optimal for sitting down and memorizing information so I can get an A on a test and only to forget it all the next day but I've only got a few more years of that...
That's pretty much how I feel. If ADD = laziness, then we would never get anything done at all. The truth is before I sought help I was very productive, especially at work when everything's fast paced and you have to be very aware of what's going on or risk serious physical injury.

I lack a better way to say it so I'll just be straight with it. There's a lot of cocky a-holes lurking in this thread and it sickens me that some of you that lack any compassion will be filling the role as a doctor. "Just force yourself to sit down with a book, stop being lazy." I can sit down with a book all day if I wanted to, but the issue is when a normal person sits down to read their biochem for an hour they can probably get through a chapter reading everything in detail and taking notes. I'll be lucky if I can get through 2 pages before my mind checks out and I have to read every paragraph 3-4 times to get all the way through it and make any sense of it. Even with adderall if you're not careful you can end up playing video games for 8 hours and not even realize it. It still takes planning, motivation, and will-power to sit down the adderall just helps you stick with it like a normal person would. It doesn't make me hyper focused or an elite student, it just helps.

Maybe we should stop prescribing prozac, those people are lazy and weak-minded and are just cheating to take the easy way through life being happy all the time, amirite?
 
Posted in similar thread:

Since it is cramming season I thought I'd make this long overdue post.
Others have commented on the foolishness of taking a friend of a friend's advice on this stuff or relying on user-generated content. I agree. I think too many people choose to abuse psychostimulants while being completely oblivious to their consequences. It is not at all harmless. So, here are two papers for you to look at:

Melega WP, Raleigh MJ, Stout DB, Huang S, Phelps ME. (1997). Ethological and 6-[18F]fluoro-L-DOPA-PET profiles of long-term vulnerability to chronic amphetamine. Behavioural Brain Research, 84, 259-268.

Melega WP, Raleigh MJ, Stout DB, Lacan G, Huang S, Phelps ME. (1997). Recovery of striatal dopamine function after acute amphetamine- and methamphetamine-induced neurotoxicity in the vervet monkey. Brain Research, 766, 113-120.
 
Adderall works I have friends that have told me AWESOME stores... If you want to use it and buy it with money go for it.
As for me I choose not to use it because I don't think that having 1 day of hard core studying is worth blowing off class for several days for. And I dont think my friends have long term retention of the information the prof is presenting
 
My brain may not be optimal for sitting down and memorizing information so I can get an A on a test and only to forget it all the next day but I've only got a few more years of that. Yes, I will always have to sit down and read things or take boards but for the most part I can place myself in an environment in which I will thrive. The meds give us the ability to excel in a "boring" environment but few of the 'normal' brains can excel in our stimulated environment.

I do not doubt the problem that you have with ADD or the fact that many people must also deal with the same set of issues, but how can ADD be defined? Is it a disease that needs curing or is it just a personality trait that makes you different from other people, and which society has labeled as a defect?

I think this argument stems much further than just ADD medication. It seems that we are arguing whether it is justified to modify ourselves through medication, surgery, etc., in order to compensate for a biological difference that makes us different from others. For example, what about someone who is great at studying and remaining focused, but can't absorb information and is maybe not very intelligent. Should he or she be able to take new drug that allows that to "be smarter" by stimulating the brain to memorize more efficiently.

I'm not saying which side is right, but this argument begs to be developed past the surface level.
 
/random

I saw an episode on dr g last week where a boy died over a generic ritalin + methadone mix up by a pharmacist who accidentally filled the latter.

scary.

/end random
 
They can beat you up, take your life... they can take everything you own, everyone you love... the only thing they cant take is your INTEGRITY. I put opportunistic, selfish scum that take these drugs without a legitimate medical need for them in the same worthless crap bucket as cheaters, criminals, and Flavor Flav. Knowing that I got what I got on my own natural merit = priceless. Scum.
 
They can beat you up, take your life... they can take everything you own, everyone you love... the only thing they cant take is your INTEGRITY. I put opportunistic, selfish scum that take these drugs without a legitimate medical need for them in the same worthless crap bucket as cheaters, criminals, and Flavor Flav. Knowing that I got what I got on my own natural merit = priceless. Scum.

Word. And to clarify my previous (old) post - I was talking about people who abuse these drugs - not people with legitimate ADHD.

Although I doubt everyone with an ADHD diagnosis actually has it.
 
I do not doubt the problem that you have with ADD or the fact that many people must also deal with the same set of issues, but how can ADD be defined? Is it a disease that needs curing or is it just a personality trait that makes you different from other people, and which society has labeled as a defect?

I think this argument stems much further than just ADD medication. It seems that we are arguing whether it is justified to modify ourselves through medication, surgery, etc., in order to compensate for a biological difference that makes us different from others. For example, what about someone who is great at studying and remaining focused, but can't absorb information and is maybe not very intelligent. Should he or she be able to take new drug that allows that to "be smarter" by stimulating the brain to memorize more efficiently.

I'm not saying which side is right, but this argument begs to be developed past the surface level.

Let's face it, we're all different and we all have our own strengths and weaknesses and that will never change. I don't see much difference in the rampant use of plastic surgery in the Miss America contest and the use of legally-obtained ADD meds. My point is that all professions, including medicine need all types of "intelligent" people. The way our education system is set up, it requires long hours of studying in front of books (I'm not criticizing, just making a point). For people with ADD (which admittedly has a broad scope of classifications) it's not the best learning environment. I don't think it's something that needs "curing" but just modified at times to fit in the environment at hand. I can focus on multiple things at once which is a huge benefit at times. Considering the full-time book learning is temporary and the real-world is long-term I don't believe taking a pill to get me through the long days/nights of studying the books a terrible thing. Obviously, I'm biased and I will fully admit my lack of expertise on the topic.
 
They can beat you up, take your life... they can take everything you own, everyone you love... the only thing they cant take is your INTEGRITY. I put opportunistic, selfish scum that take these drugs without a legitimate medical need for them in the same worthless crap bucket as cheaters, criminals, and Flavor Flav. Knowing that I got what I got on my own natural merit = priceless. Scum.


Scum? really? Im not sure that someone who is taking the drugs is a worthless pos. While i dont agree with their decision there is probably a reason why they are doing it (i.e. they feel inadequate, they wont be able to keep up w/o it etc). I dont view taking adderall, methylphenidate etc as cheating if anything its comparable to someone chugging bunches of caffiene to stay up and cram before the exam, neither are healthy and they dont produce long term retention, but you do what you have to.

If anything i think society as a whole is putting students and professionals in a spot where they think that have to be smarter and quicker. This cosmetic nuerology is something that is going to continue to be an issue in America.
 
Yay I WINZ :laugh:

In all seriousness, you provided a rational dissenting opinion and you allowed me to more fully develop my own ideas which means this was a conversation worth having. Buon riposo!
I wonder if Drogba is in medical school, Drogba are you still active?
 
I wonder if Drogba is in medical school, Drogba are you still active?

He probably doesn't have the time as a member of the Montreal Impact.

Also I don't know why people seem to think that speed makes you smarter. I guess it's easier to paint everything with the same brush- plastic surgery for beauty contest cheaters, steroids for sports cheaters, adderall for school cheaters. Except it doesn't make you smarter, just impairs cognition while keeping you awake until you come to a jittery crash.
 
I don't use it and never have, I'm sure people do but I'm neutral about it. Maybe I would care if the courses were curved, like in undergrad, but since what they do doesn't effect me I'm pretty okay with it.

I can study at coffee shops, with no ear phones, and still read and get a lot done. I could probably study while running from zombies, but that's just my thing — I actually have a harder time when things are too quiet. But, on the other hand, I have a lot of anxiety and while it eventually goes away it really attenuates slowly. So, I may have to take things to take down my anxiety, others might have to take things to get them in their zone. In the end, we're all going to be doctors, and as long as they're competent and dependable I really could care less how they got there.

Some people have ADHD, a minority, so my opinion matters for not for this group because opinions don't overrule facts.
 
I don't use it and never have, I'm sure people do but I'm neutral about it. Maybe I would care if the courses were curved, like in undergrad, but since what they do doesn't effect me I'm pretty okay with it.

I can study at coffee shops, with no ear phones, and still read and get a lot done. I could probably study while running from zombies, but that's just my thing — I actually have a harder time when things are too quiet. But, on the other hand, I have a lot of anxiety and while it eventually goes away it really attenuates slowly. So, I may have to take things to take down my anxiety, others might have to take things to get them in their zone. In the end, we're all going to be doctors, and as long as they're competent and dependable I really could care less how they got there.

Some people have ADHD, a minority, so my opinion matters for not for this group because opinions don't overrule facts.

Only a fraction of desperate pre-meds are going to be doctors, certainly not all. But regardless it doesn't actually give you an edge any more than a massive amount of coffee does.
 
Only a fraction of desperate pre-meds are going to be doctors, certainly not all. But regardless it doesn't actually give you an edge any more than a massive amount of coffee does.

Guys sure do go through a lot of trouble to just get that Starbucks.
 
Only a fraction of desperate pre-meds are going to be doctors, certainly not all. But regardless it doesn't actually give you an edge any more than a massive amount of coffee does.
I used it once to study for a final my freshman year. It was pretty effective, I noticed its effects most when I had finished a practice problem set or a textbook page, instead of thinking about taking a break I was excited to flip the page and see the next set of problems. I just used that experience as a guidepost for how to effectively study in the future and I never took it again. Coffee past noon just made me jittery and nauseated.
 
I used it once to study for a final my freshman year. It was pretty effective, I noticed its effects most when I had finished a practice problem set or a textbook page, instead of thinking about taking a break I was excited to flip the page and see the next set of problems. I just used that experience as a guidepost for how to effectively study in the future and I never took it again. Coffee past noon just made me jittery and nauseated.

Yeah, it enhances "focus" and essentially stops you from becoming bored because anything you fixate on will captivate your attention in a satisfying way. But then you come down. It would make a world of difference to someone who has a test in 6 hours and hasn't started studying, but it's not effective in the long-term because you can't always be high, nor are you thinking more clearly while you're on it. You'd take the pills, study very very efficiently, and then it wears off and the opposite is true (along with dysphoria, jitters, etc.). I doubt any studies have been done on this, but in students without ADD there's no way it would systematically improve yours grades over the course of a semester.

It just always amuses me when people treat it as a magic cheat pill that gives high grades. Decent gains in focus while studying for a few hours until it wears off and you're a wreck aren't going to get a poor student into med school. Half the benefit is probably people thinking it's more effective than it is because of the euphoria. If someone wants to destroy their body and become strung out for brief periods of increased efficiency in studying, it shouldn't bother anyone else. No one is unfairly taking a spot in med school because of amphetamines.
 
You guys are going to have a real tough time in psych rotations. A lot of the things people are saying here are pretty hateful towards people's conditions, and I expect better from people who want to be doctors.

Here's what I can say on it, as someone with ADHD, who managed for a long time without stimulants (but with caffeine self medication), and have found them useful as well:

With actual ADHD, the stimulants actually make you calmer. Having had ADHD for my whole life, diagnosed officially for most of college, and only started taking a stimulant rx for them senior year, its kind of remarkably actually. It really reduced stress as well, I felt much more ordered in my life. That alone is worth taking them, for the same reason we give them to 3rd graders. My grades have been pretty good on and off stimulants, they helped some, but not because of being able to stay up all night; I can do that with caffeine and willpower. Actually did more all nighters without amphetamines than I have with; I really love the peace of the middle of the night, and the feeling of clarity from being in the sun the next day.

It's not that you can't dose up on the crank and do tasks all night; it works really well for that. But really only works for repetitive tasks. Like writing (Jack Kerouac wrote "On the Road" in one sitting basically, cranked out on Benzedrex), problem sets, or driving (there's a reason truckers do meth). My friend had the best description of its mode of action: It make the spreadsheet you're working on the best thing ever, you don't need the SQUIRREL outside your window to entertain you.

It's utility in studying is diminished for those without ADHD. From experience, I would caution against it; it probably will not help you. It really doesn't let you memorize more than you are capable of. It's utility in papers and projects cannot be stated enough. It helped me plow through hundreds of pages of graduate readings, and write excellent essays when I would otherwise have gotten sidetracked on topics. I've watched my cracked out English major friend (/fiend. Missing the "r" isn't incorrect. But really bad ADHD too) read a book and do a paper in one 20 hour sitting, then do another one after it.
 
Top