Study drugs in med school

[Foot Fetish]

Do people abuse study drugs like amphetamine and modafinil a lot in medical school? People used to use these drugs a lot in my undergrad, without prescriptions, to gain an advantage on exams. Personally, I think it's hugely unfair unless you have a legitimate medical need (though, let's be real, ADD is hugely overdiagnosed in America)...So, what do you think? How common is it at your school, and how do you feel about it?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[theseeker4]

Do people abuse study drugs like amphetamine and modafinil a lot in medical school? People used to use these drugs a lot in my undergrad, without prescriptions, to gain an advantage on exam. Personally, I think it's hugely unfair unless you have a legitimate medical need (though, let's be real, ADD is hugely overdiagnosed in America)...So, what do you think? How common is it at your school, and how do you feel about it?

Happens quite a bit, nothing you can really do bout it, so either get through med school without using them (which I did) or jump on the train and find a dr willing to perscribe them to you. Either way, stop worrying about other people when you should be focused on your own performance, and definitely don't fall into the trap of pretending other people's unfair advantages are holding you back.

 

[Redpancreas]

...

 

[Petypet]

to gain an advantage on exams

so you're telling me if i snorted adderall i would've gotten a 270 step 1, shoot....

 

[Foot Fetish]

so you're telling me if i snorted adderall i would've gotten a 270 step 1, shoot....

The cognition enhancing effects of amphetamine are well-known. It obviously won't turn an idiot into a genius, but it is undeniably an advantage. Are you seriously denying the massive amount of research proving the performance enhancing effects of amphetamine?

 

[NWwildcat2013]

Im pretty sure you don't retain much long term when you learn on a 48h stimulant bender.

Also... if you are using them that usually means you didn't study consistently in advance and are operating with a much lower baseline level of knowledge and won't reach the same breadth or depth of knowledge a long term studier does.

 

[Mr Roboto]

The cognition enhancing effects of amphetamine are well-known. It obviously won't turn an idiot into a genius, but it is undeniably an advantage. Are you seriously denying the massive amount of research proving the performance enhancing effects of amphetamine?

Links to papers demonstrating amphetamines increase intelligence, please.

 

[JustaDO]

- Humble brag

Some of your thought provoking threads.

 

[Crayola227]

View attachment 207544 - Humble brag
View attachment 207549
View attachment 207546
View attachment 207547
View attachment 207548


Some of your thought provoking threads.

Yes, but it just supports how much the OP needs the "edge."

 

[Rekt]

Mostly just huge groups of foreign kids at my school, mostly the middle easterners.

 

[Foot Fetish]

Links to papers demonstrating amphetamines increase intelligence, please.

I never said they make you more intelligent. They just provide a temporary enhancement of cognition. Cognition is not synonymous with intelligence.

Mostly just huge groups of foreign kids at my school, mostly the middle easterners.

How's that feel going?

 

[CherryRedDracul]

Strong username, OP. Also, can't stop looking at your avatar. I'm a sucker for pretty feet.

To answer your question to stay on topic, yes.

 

[Petypet]

They just provide a temporary enhancement of cognition.

Kind of like viagra for your brain?

 

[TheStallion16]

Adderall has been proven to increase focus and energy, but studies have actually shown it has no effect on test performance. Any cognitive improvements have been shown to be very mild and varies depending on the person. So it really isn't that big of an "unfair advantage" if at all. It tends not to really help people that much who don't actually need it.

 

[mw18]

I don't know if anyone else is using anything to help them. I know I don't. I know that some med schools are competitive, but if they are finding a way to learn more then I'm not gonna cry about it. It's their health. Maybe it will make them better doctors.

Edit: quick submit by accident.

 

[Psai]

Strong username, OP. Also, can't stop looking at your avatar. I'm a sucker for pretty feet.

To answer your question to stay on topic, yes.

? Those feet kind of creep me out, I think it's the nail polish

 

[Sleman]

Honestly, who cares!

I don't know anyone doing drugs for tests, I think it's an individual behavior.

 

[dissonance_]

.

 

[Foot Fetish]

? Those feet kind of creep me out, I think it's the nail polish

You lack the nuanced eye of a foot aficionado. I've been "studying" the female foot for years, and I can assure you those are some Grade A feet. Black polish is top tier pedicure color btw.

 

[Mr Roboto]

You lack the nuanced eye of a foot aficionado. I've been "studying" the female foot for years, and I can assure you those are some Grade A feet. Black polish is top tier pedicure color btw.

But @Psai studied them for five minutes while taking adderall. He had an unfair advantage.

 

[oOKawaiiOo]

Strong username, OP. Also, can't stop looking at your avatar. I'm a sucker for pretty feet.

 

[Foot Fetish]

View attachment 208216

I pity you normies. You will never know the pleasures of lusting after beautiful feet. I am basically in heaven every spring/summer when girls start busting out the flip flops....makes it hard to focus in class sometimes though lol....

 

[Setto]

I pity you normies. You will never know the pleasures of lusting after beautiful feet. I am basically in heaven every spring/summer when girls start busting out the flip flops....makes it hard to focus in class sometimes though lol....

You should try Adderall.

 

[sloop]

I have ADD (diagnosed as a kid) and take a prescription psychostimulant. That said, who cares?

I don't think anybody is obligated to sacrifice realizing their full potential for the sake of some abstract feeling that stimulant use is unfair.

What if disabled people thought it was unfair that we could walk around so freely? Should we all strap weights to ourselves to even the score?

 

[Foot Fetish]

I have ADD (diagnosed as a kid) and take a prescription psychostimulant. That said, who cares?

I don't think anybody is obligated to sacrifice realizing their full potential for the sake of some abstract feeling that stimulant use is unfair.

What if disabled people thought it was unfair that we could walk around so freely? Should we all strap weights to ourselves to even the score?

It's not unfair if you have a legitimate medical need for it. It is unfair if you have normal neurochemistry. You know how some people get extra time on exams if they have a learning disability? It would be like pretending to have that just so you could get extra time on an exam. Totally not cool.

 

[sloop]

It's not unfair if you have a legitimate medical need for it. It is unfair if you have normal neurochemistry. You know how some people get extra time on exams if they have a learning disability? It would be like pretending to have that just so you could get extra time on an exam. Totally not cool.

I don't think these are the same thing. One is avoiding the usual structural constraints of the test while the other is doing something that allows you to operate better within the same constraints of the test.

In any case, one way I've explained this in the past is the following: would you rather fly in the airplane piloted by the person who is "cognitively enhanced" or the one piloted by the person who has eschewed cognitive enhancers because they're "unfair"?

 

[Foot Fetish]

I don't think these are the same thing. One is avoiding the usual structural constraints of the test while the other is doing something that allows you to operate better within the same constraints of the test.

In any case, one way I've explained this in the past is the following: would you rather fly in the airplane piloted by the person who is "cognitively enhanced" or the one piloted by the person who has eschewed cognitive enhancers because they're "unfair"?

Yeah, but the principle of it is unethical if you think about the actual reason WHY people consider it unfair. Let me explain. Let's assume there are two candidate competing for a single surgical residency spot. Applicant A has a greater natural aptitude and would outperform Applicant B if they were both unmedicated. But Applicant B takes illegal Adderall and boosts his academic performance to where he is now performing at or above the level of Applicant A. This may result in Applicant B getting the spot instead of Applicant A, which would be unfair since Applicant A would have innately made a better doctor due to his superior aptitude. The only valid counterargument to this would be if Applicant B continued to take Adderall for the rest of his life to compensate for his relative lack of innate capability. The moment he stops artificially enhancing himself, he has committed an unethical act because he has robbed the medical community of an asset i.e. he was responsible for Applicant A not making it into the specialty and thus not contributing his natural talent to it.

The point is that we want the most capable people getting the jobs, not people who are only capable when they're abusing drugs.

 

[Donald Kimball]

Yeah, but the principle of it is unethical if you think about the actual reason WHY people consider it unfair. Let me explain. Let's assume there are two candidate competing for a single surgical residency spot. Applicant A has a greater natural aptitude and would outperform Applicant B if they were both unmedicated. But Applicant B takes illegal Adderall and boosts his academic performance to where he is now performing at or above the level of Applicant A. This may result in Applicant B getting the spot instead of Applicant A, which would be unfair since Applicant A would have innately made a better doctor due to his superior aptitude. The only valid counterargument to this would be if Applicant B continued to take Adderall for the rest of his life to compensate for his relative lack of innate capability. The moment he stops artificially enhancing himself, he has committed an unethical act because he has robbed the medical community of an asset i.e. he was responsible for Applicant A not making it into the specialty and thus not contributing his natural talent to it.

The point is that we want the most capable people getting the jobs, not people who are only capable when they're abusing drugs.

Does this argument still hold when applicant A is competing against applicant C who abuses caffeine?

 

[Foot Fetish]

Does this argument still hold when applicant A is competing against applicant C who abuses caffeine?

Eh. Caffeine is not a scheduled narcotic. It's like comparing whey protein powder to anabolic steroids in terms of bodybuilding. It is totally accepted, legal, and even expected for anyone to drink whey protein, but roidz are considered unfair. Speed is not even in the same league as caffeine imo.

 

[sloop]

Yeah, but the principle of it is unethical if you think about the actual reason WHY people consider it unfair. Let me explain. Let's assume there are two candidate competing for a single surgical residency spot. Applicant A has a greater natural aptitude and would outperform Applicant B if they were both unmedicated. But Applicant B takes illegal Adderall and boosts his academic performance to where he is now performing at or above the level of Applicant A. This may result in Applicant B getting the spot instead of Applicant A, which would be unfair since Applicant A would have innately made a better doctor due to his superior aptitude. The only valid counterargument to this would be if Applicant B continued to take Adderall for the rest of his life to compensate for his relative lack of innate capability. The moment he stops artificially enhancing himself, he has committed an unethical act because he has robbed the medical community of an asset i.e. he was responsible for Applicant A not making it into the specialty and thus not contributing his natural talent to it.

The point is that we want the most capable people getting the jobs, not people who are only capable when they're abusing drugs.

Dude, what does fair even mean in this situation? Is it fair that some people are born smarter than other people? If yes, then why is it not equally fair for people to even the score by compensating for something that was not in their control by using cognitive enhancers? If not, then isn't any pretension of fairness already out the window?

 

[Mr Roboto]

Eh. Caffeine is not a scheduled narcotic. It's like comparing whey protein powder to anabolic steroids in terms of bodybuilding. It is totally accepted, legal, and even expected for anyone to drink whey protein, but roidz are considered unfair. Speed is not even in the same league as caffeine imo.

Amphetamine salts isn't a "scheduled narcotic," either. Give it a rest man.

 

[Foot Fetish]

Amphetamine salts isn't a "scheduled narcotic," either. Give it a rest man.

Uhhh...It's classified as a Schedule II narcotic under the Controlled Substances Act, you goddamn junkie. Legally, it's just one step under drugs like heroin, cocaine, and methamphetamine. Stop spouting bull****.

 

[Taddy Mason]

Uhhh...It's classified as a Schedule II narcotic under the Controlled Substances Act, you goddamn junkie. Legally, it's just one step under drugs like heroin, cocaine, and methamphetamine. Stop spouting bull****.

Coke and meth are also schedule II substances...

 

[Mr Roboto]

Uhhh...It's classified as a Schedule II narcotic under the Controlled Substances Act, you goddamn junkie. Legally, it's just one step under drugs like heroin, cocaine, and methamphetamine. Stop spouting bull****.

It's a Schedule IIN stimulant. Not a narcotic.

http://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/schedules/index.html#define

 

[Foot Fetish]

Coke and meth are also schedule II substances...

That just further proves my point. Adderall is on the same level as meth and cocaine, and people like @Mr Roboto pretend it's the same as Flintstones vitamin. It's literally speed, and it's disgusting that future doctors would be abusing it. If you can't hack the curriculum on your own, maybe you don't deserve to be here in the first place (with the exception of people who have a LEGITIMATE diagnosis of ADD). And for the record, I think it's bull**** when people get diagnosed with ADD in med school...They wouldn't have made it to med school in the first place if they really had ADD. They're just lazy and want a boost. Pathetic.

 

[Taddy Mason]

That just further proves my point. Adderall is on the same level as meth and cocaine, and people like @Mr Roboto pretend it's the same as Flintstones vitamin. It's literally speed, and it's disgusting that future doctors would be abusing it. If you can't hack the curriculum on your own, maybe you don't deserve to be here in the first place (with the exception of people who have a LEGITIMATE diagnosis of ADD).

They're Schedule II because they have a legitimate medical use.

And for the record, I think it's bull**** when people get diagnosed with ADD in med school...They wouldn't have made it to med school in the first place if they really had ADD. They're just lazy and want a boost. Pathetic.

I know several people who were Dx with ADD in grad school and med school. Its not laziness, some people are able remain highly functional and deal with their Sx while being largely unaware of having attention problems until they hit a breaking point (e.g., the demands of med school) where their Sx start to have a significantly negative impact their lives. Also, if a physician is really that suspect that a person is drug seeking and doesn't have ADD they can always refer the patient to a psychologist for testing.

 

[piii]

OP spends a lot of time worrying about other people and posting about it on SDN.

 

[mats7]

A professor at a medical school my friend goes to went over ways in class on how to potentiate/maximize amphetamines with a little wink. They applied renal and neural physiology, named specific transporter proteins, etc. Hey, if it makes you be a better person with no side effects, whatever.

 

[Foot Fetish]

Also, if a physician is really that suspect that a person is drug seeking and doesn't have ADD they can always refer the patient to a psychologist for testing.

That can be easily faked. It's not like a blood test. When it comes to mental diseases, all you have to go by is the patients' behavior and HPI. Consider the PHQ9. Anyone could go in and get prescribed antidepressants just by filling out a maximum score on the questionnaire...same thing for ADD. All it takes is saying that you can't focus and then pretending like you can't focus if they test you.

A lot of lazy people would get their speed taken away if we had a biochemical test for ADD.

 

[The Knife & Gun Club]

Uhhh...It's classified as a Schedule II narcotic under the Controlled Substances Act, you goddamn junkie. Legally, it's just one step under drugs like heroin, cocaine, and methamphetamine. Stop spouting bull****.

Also I'm pretty sure Modafinil is like a schedule 3 or something since it doesn't have a significant risk of addiction.

That said I don't think those drugs are as helpful as you think. I've taken pretty much every prescribable psychostimulant under the sun (all through legal, physician prescribed channels), and never saw a significant increase in academic abilities.

It made it more pleasant to stay up late and focus on super boring school stuff, but the actual academic yield is remarkably low. Amphetamine derivatives certainly don't improve intelligence and in many people actively reduce academic potential IMO.

That's why after having access to Modafinil, vyvanse, adderall, etc, I decided I learn better without any of them. So I wouldn't openly assume everyone who's taking them is actually benefiting...they may just like being "high" while they study.

 

[Foot Fetish]

Also I'm pretty sure Modafinil is like a schedule 3 or something since it doesn't have a significant risk of addiction.

That said I don't think those drugs are as helpful as you think. I've taken pretty much every prescribable psychostimulant under the sun (all through legal, physician prescribed channels), and never saw a significant increase in academic abilities.

It made it more pleasant to stay up late and focus on super boring school stuff, but the actual academic yield is remarkably low. Amphetamine derivatives certainly don't improve intelligence and in many people actively reduce academic potential IMO.

That's why after having access to Modafinil, vyvanse, adderall, etc, I decided I learn better without any of them. So I wouldn't openly assume everyone who's taking them is actually benefiting...they may just like being "high" while they study.

By the way, how was Modafinil? I was reading a paper recently that made it seem like Adderall 2.0. Obviously you didn't find any of them too useful academically, but in general how did you find that Modafinil compared to the amphetamines? I'm just curious since it's a relatively new drug which is being used 0ff-label for ADD (only officially approved for narcolepsy and shift work sleep disorder).

 

[Taddy Mason]

That can be easily faked. It's not like a blood test. When it comes to mental diseases, all you have to go by is the patients' behavior and HPI. Consider the PHQ9. Anyone could go in and get prescribed antidepressants just by filling out a maximum score on the questionnaire...same thing for ADD. All it takes is saying that you can't focus and then pretending like you can't focus if they test you.

A lot of lazy people would get their speed taken away if we had a biochemical test for ADD.

You clearly know nothing about Dx-ing or psychometric testing for ADD.

 

[The Knife & Gun Club]

By the way, how was Modafinil? I was reading a paper recently that made it seem like Adderall 2.0. Obviously you didn't find any of them too useful academically, but in general how did you find that Modafinil compared to the amphetamines? I'm just curious since it's a relatively new drug which is being used 0ff-label for ADD (only officially approved for narcolepsy and shift work sleep disorder).

I hated the side effects of traditional ADHD medication. So modafinil is nice in that it doesn't cause the loss of appetite, mood destabilization, etc.

But it's just not particularly useful in treating ADHD.

 

[Donald Kimball]

Eh. Caffeine is not a scheduled narcotic. It's like comparing whey protein powder to anabolic steroids in terms of bodybuilding. It is totally accepted, legal, and even expected for anyone to drink whey protein, but roidz are considered unfair. Speed is not even in the same league as caffeine imo.

So, let me get this straight: your addictive performance drug of choice is GOOD because it's legal or unscheduled, but someone else's addictive performance drug of choice is BAD because it's illegal or scheduled?

 

[Foot Fetish]

So, let me get this straight: your addictive performance drug of choice is GOOD because it's legal or unscheduled, but someone else's addictive performance drug of choice is BAD because it's illegal or scheduled?

Yeah, typically we outlaw things that are bad. That's sort of the point of laws.

 

[Taddy Mason]

Yeah, typically we outlaw things that are bad. That's sort of the point of laws.

Ah, so that's why booze and tobacco are legal and marijuana is illegal.

 

[Donald Kimball]

Yeah, typically we outlaw things that are bad. That's sort of the point of laws.

One time, alcohol was illegal. And then it wasn't. So, by your reasoning, it was bad, and then it was good, despite nothing about the substance changing in the interim. Just because society deems using caffeine "good," doesn't make it inherently different from using amphetamines, which society deems "bad." Alcohol and cigarette smoking are legal (and GOOD by your logic), but LSD is not. How many lives have the former claimed vs the latter?

At the end of the day, people use performance enhancing substances, techniques, etc. It's silly to equivocate that one is morally better or worse than another, more or less fair than another, or cheating vs not, when they all boil down to the same thing. In fact, if it's so easy to get diagnosed with ADHD and receive stimulants, then how could it be unfair? Surely that's more fair than being born as a white male in the upper class, living care free of medical or economic concerns, receiving an excellent private school education, going on to an Ivy League undergrad and medical school, and becoming a neurosurgeon, right?

 

[Mad Jack]

That can be easily faked. It's not like a blood test. When it comes to mental diseases, all you have to go by is the patients' behavior and HPI. Consider the PHQ9. Anyone could go in and get prescribed antidepressants just by filling out a maximum score on the questionnaire...same thing for ADD. All it takes is saying that you can't focus and then pretending like you can't focus if they test you.

A lot of lazy people would get their speed taken away if we had a biochemical test for ADD.

There's a lot of aversion to giving people ADHD meds after a certain age. You have to pass a really thorough series of psychometric tests, have proven cognitive difficulties in school, etc.

Plenty of people get pills off of those with a legitimate script though, but that's something that goes all the way back to high school. I'd bet if you ran a hair test on most med school classes, only about 50% would pass between all of the drugs that are out there. I don't use any drugs of any sort myself, aside from benadryl to sleep, and don't really care if others do, but I'm just sayin' it as a matter of fact- many of these kids are doing the same stuff other people their age are doing, plus a little amphetamines on the side.

 

[sloop]

That can be easily faked. It's not like a blood test. When it comes to mental diseases, all you have to go by is the patients' behavior and HPI. Consider the PHQ9. Anyone could go in and get prescribed antidepressants just by filling out a maximum score on the questionnaire...same thing for ADD. All it takes is saying that you can't focus and then pretending like you can't focus if they test you.

A lot of lazy people would get their speed taken away if we had a biochemical test for ADD.

I had an EEG, MRI, several psychometric testing sessions with a clinical psychologist and a neuropsychologist (including IQ tests, tests of visuospatial reasoning, etc.), multiple questionnaires filled out by different teachers and several years of attempts with one-on-one occupational therapy and behavioral modification. I then failed Straterra treatment (well, I am told it helped a little but nowhere near enough), before I finally got prescribed Ritalin.

I get that my experience might be slightly more intense than most, but still . . . It wasn't like "Wahh! I can't concentrate!" "Okay, here's Ritalin."

 

[Mad Jack]

Yeah, typically we outlaw things that are bad. That's sort of the point of laws.

That drugs are "bad" is a largely subjective assessment. Objectively, can we state that all of the illegal drugs out there are bad? Many are simply deemed "not having any medical or therapeutic use," but since when is something not being useful worth making it illegal?

Drugs being illegal largely goes back to Christian ideals of sobriety that had roots in the Old Testament. There isn't some objective basis for determining that mind-altered states are bad, and in many cultures and religions throughout history, such experiences have been considered divine rather than a societal ill. That drugs are illegal is therefore more a historical curiosity, a vestigial remnant of laws based upon the founding religion of our forefathers.