Is using Adderall without perscription cheating?

[foster033]

---

Members don't see this ad.

No it's ******ed. It's just as much of a drug as cocaine or amphetamine. Would you take those? Just because it's legal doesn't mean squat. It's still a drug and don't put drugs in your body unless you need them to live/function.

I can't believe anybody who wants to be a doctor would abuse drugs.

Alcohol is a drug that can be just as dangerous as cocaine...does that mean anyone who drinks shouldn't be a doctor in your opinion?

 

[Lacheln]

No it's ******ed. It's just as much of a drug as cocaine or amphetamine. Would you take those? Just because it's legal doesn't mean squat. It's still a drug and don't put drugs in your body unless you need them to live/function.

I can't believe anybody who wants to be a doctor would abuse drugs.

🙄🙄🙄

No coffee, alcohol or over the counter stuff for you then I assume? (It's very common for undiagnosed ADD peeps to unconsciously heavily self-medicate with caffeine.)

 

[chessknt]

🙄🙄🙄

No coffee, alcohol or over the counter stuff for you then I assume? (It's very common for undiagnosed ADD peeps to unconsciously heavily self-medicate with caffeine.)

What is the cause of ADD (ie how is it definitely diagnosed)?

 

[coldweatherblue]

My ex for example was brilliant, but never did well in school due to his ADD - on ritalin he was amazing. He should have kept his contributions to himself in order to...in order to what?

yeah, this is where the debate gets much more grey than the debate about illegally prescribed usage.

It is really great that your ex saw obvious benefits from cognitive enhancing drugs, and no one can make judgments about his contributions otherwise. I guess ultimately I just think it's a shame that we put so much emphasis on education that we feel the need to change the behavior of those who don't academically excel.

 

[Lacheln]

What is the cause of ADD (ie how is it definitely diagnosed)?

It isn't typically "definitely" diagnosed, it's still a subjective diagnosis. However, fMRI technology is making objective diagnosis techniques more of a reality.

The postulated cause, however, is low dopamine levels, or low dopamine receptor levels. Caffeine increases dopamine, as does cocaine and speed.

 

[Lacheln]

yeah, this is where the debate gets much more grey than the debate about illegally prescribed usage.

Do you mean unprescribed usage? Illegally prescribed is sort of an oxymoron, carelessly prescribed though...

It is really great that your ex saw obvious benefits from cognitive enhancing drugs, and no one can make judgments about his contributions otherwise. I guess ultimately I just think it's a shame that we put so much emphasis on education that we feel the need to change the behavior of those who don't academically excel.

??!?!? He's a talented researcher in medical physics. The world benefits from his behavior being changed. I think you're bringing up the whole "psychiatry changes who people are" argument, but again I'd say it's outdated stigma to apply different standards regarding quality of life to brain-based issues vs. somatic. It certainly didn't change the essence of who he was, except for alleviating the depression and social difficulties he had because of ADD.

Anyway, I appreciate that you are willing to at least acknowledge it was beneficial in this case.

 

[foster033]

yeah, this is where the debate gets much more grey than the debate about illegally prescribed usage.

It is really great that your ex saw obvious benefits from cognitive enhancing drugs, and no one can make judgments about his contributions otherwise. I guess ultimately I just think it's a shame that we put so much emphasis on education that we feel the need to change the behavior of those who don't academically excel.

Right, I agree we put too much emphasis on higher education in this country, not everyone can or should go to college...(not referring to the situation you described breeak)

Part of the debate for me is what is really "normal". If you're different from the general population or anyone else, does that really mean you're abnormal or are you just different. If one person is allowed to alter the personality/abilities they were born with simply b/c they are unable to excel in school why can't someone who excels in school do the same thing to do even better? If a drug benefits you (good outweighs the bad) why is it wrong to take it? We do similar things on a daily basis...Parents can select the sex of their child through artificial insemination, have children when they would otherwise be incapable, end pregnancies where children are known to have a disease, we allow people to take weight loss drugs, energy supplements, sleeping pills, blood pressure and cholesterol medication, and a host of other things that enhance our lives, change what is normal for our body and enhance our natural abilities...while medication is helpful in some of these areas, lifestyle changes could do the same things yet we don't generally fault people who are taking these medicines...where do we draw the line?

It's an ethical debate for sure but it's a lot more complicated than some people are making it out to be...

 

[CubaLibre]

If you believe that patients are entitled to the best care possible, then you should believe that they are entitled to be treated by physicians who had the chops to make it through the system without using an illegal crutch, rather than someone who needed additional support.

The fact is, the path to practice medicine is a competitive one, and deservedly so; not everyone can or should be allowed to practice medicine.

It must feel good knowing that you are among the most intelligent in our society.

 

[EpiPEN]

Really don't see what's wrong with the so called "mental enhancemnet drugs." We do all kinds of things to enhance our ability to perform well in school whether it's getting extra sleep before a test, drinking coffee, or even eating energy and sugar rich foods while studying. Some of us are born able to handle certain things without any extra help from outside factors and some of us can't compete on the same level unless there is some sort of a boost. If someone is willing to deal with the side effects and the long term lifestyle impacts of taking an enhancement drug, then I say let him/her. As long as the drug isn't lillegal that is.

 

[halekulani]

and I never will....

under your argument a prescription equates to non-abuse and someone using it without a prescription equates to abuse...
you're confusing abuse with something being legal and illegal, but they're not the same thing.

what?

the drug was intended for people who have ADHD/narcolepsy
if you don't have ADHD, you're using the drug for something else that is personal, and that's drug abuse.

it is up to people to own up to their actions, whether it is underage drinking, stealing from the internet, or drug abuse. denial just shows that they're immature cowards trying to justify their actions with lame excuses.

 

[foster033]

what?

the drug was intended for people who have ADHD/narcolepsy
if you don't have ADHD, you're using the drug for something else that is personal, and that's drug abuse.

Not having a prescription is not the same thing as not having ADHD.
And definition of abuse varies...there really is no agreed upon definition, i.e. what you and I consider abuse may be different things, it doesn't mean either one of us is necessarily wrong, just that we have different opinions.

it is up to people to own up to their actions, whether it is underage drinking, stealing from the internet, or drug abuse. denial just shows that they're immature cowards trying to justify their actions with lame excuses.

That's pretty harsh thing to say about anyone without knowing their situation or circumstances...

less judging more understanding, it will take you far. 🙂

 

[halekulani]

Not having a prescription is not the same thing as not having ADHD.
And definition of abuse varies...there really is no agreed upon definition, i.e. what you and I consider abuse may be different things, it doesn't mean either one of us is necessarily wrong, just that we have different opinions.



That's pretty harsh thing to say about anyone without knowing their situation or circumstances...

less judging more understanding, it will take you far. 🙂

keep backpedaling

the underlying assumption was you don't have adhd yet you still use it.

 

[foster033]

keep backpedaling

the underlying assumption was you don't have adhd yet you still use it.

😕😕

You really shouldn't assume things...never in any of these posts have I said that I've taken adderall...actually, I believe I've said multiple times that I never have...obviously you need some help in your reading comprehension skills... (and if you aren't specifically refering to me then you need help in your writing skills).

I just think I have absolutely no right to determine what other people should do. If you don't want to take adderall...dont' take it, but it really isn't your place to judge others about the choices they make.

There have actually been a few different situations going around here...one of them is that you shouldn't take adderall without a prescription, another is you shouldn't take it if you don't have ADHD (which is really impossible to know for sure). Why don't you try reading the conversation again so you know what it is you're referring to before you comment.

it's one thing to have an opinion, it's another thing to condemn someone b/c they don't share your views. So again, less judging, more understand.

 

[scarletgirl777]

Yes, college is about getting an education, but it's also a time to explore who you really are and what you really want to do, it has always been that way...but it seems like these days you better know what it is before you get there or you might be screwed.

It's unrealistic to ask 18 years olds, many who have never been away from home, to immediately become responsible adults without much supervision and always make the right decision. I don't think the majority of people are mature enough for college when they're 18 and find it hard to handle the social pressures that go along it. Which sounds more fun?... doing your homework or going out with your friends...most people know the responsible thing to do but are afraid of missing out on the social experience and find that with adderall they can overextend themselves without forfeiting their grades. The increased use is just a symptom of the unhealthy education system in this country.

Oh, so privileged college students who illegally buy drugs to keep up with their coursework are doing it because it's SOCIETY'S fault. Now I understand! 🙄

Most people are not using drugs to do their coursework, so I'm of course skeptical of any claim that prescription drug abuse is the fault of our education system.

 

[scarletgirl777]

😕😕

You really shouldn't assume things...never in any of these posts have I said that I've taken adderall...actually, I believe I've said multiple times that I never have...obviously you need some help in your reading comprehension skills... (and if you aren't specifically refering to me then you need help in your writing skills).

I just think I have absolutely no right to determine what other people should do. If you don't want to take adderall...dont' take it, but it really isn't your place to judge others about the choices they make.

There have actually been a few different situations going around here...one of them is that you shouldn't take adderall without a prescription, another is you shouldn't take it if you don't have ADHD (which is really impossible to know for sure). Why don't you try reading the conversation again so you know what it is you're referring to before you comment.

it's one thing to have an opinion, it's another thing to condemn someone b/c they don't share your views. So again, less judging, more understand.

Hmm, maybe I was reading his post wrong, but if someone were to read what you responded to with "you" as the figurative "you," not "you" as in "you the user foster", there's really not a whole lot of judging go on there. Don't know why you're assuming otherwise.

 

[scarletgirl777]

and I never will....

under your argument a prescription equates to non-abuse and someone using it without a prescription equates to abuse...
you're confusing abuse with something being legal and illegal, but they're not the same thing.

you need to look at the individual circumstances of each case and determine that. There are plenty of people who get legal prescriptions for adderall or pain medication who abuse them just as there are lots of people who don't take the time to get the proper prescription for whatever reason and still very much need the drugs.

Official definition of prescription drug abuse:

[SIZE=-1][SIZE=-1]"The intentional misuse of a medication outside of the normally accepted standards of its use.[/SIZE][/SIZE]"

Someday, you can maybe become an important bigwig in health policy who will change the definition. Until then, it is what it is.

 

[foster033]

Oh, so privileged college students who illegally buy drugs to keep up with their coursework are doing it because it's SOCIETY'S fault. Now I understand! 🙄

Most people are not using drugs to do their coursework, so I'm of course skeptical of any claim that prescription drug abuse is the fault of our education system.

I think we've already established that the legality is not the issue here...

you've misinterpreted what I said a little bit...it's not necessarily society fault, it's more of a cause and effect relationship. It's a byproduct of always having to be smarter and better than the generation that came before you. Well there's only so much any person can do without some type of outside influence...
not to mention that in America you are looked down upon if you didn't go to college...many entry level jobs require a college degree when you'd do more than adequate with a high school diploma and some on the job training. Many people are forced to go to school by their parents or the high school they went to but don't necessarily belong there and do what the need to do so as not to disappoint anyone. It's not as black and white as you make it out to be.

I think everyone here would benefit from thinking outside of your limiting experience...not everything is so black and white. Hopefully, when you all grow up a little bit and enter the real world you'll realize this. (this is obviously not directed at everyone).

 

[foster033]

Hmm, maybe I was reading his post wrong, but if someone were to read what you responded to with "you" as the figurative "you," not "you" as in "you the user foster", there's really not a whole lot of judging go on there. Don't know why you're assuming otherwise.

Well, if it wasn't referring to me personally then it should have said something like...' if someone doesn't have ADHD yet they still use it'..anyway...it's still judging whether it's used figuratively or not...you're still referring to people in general and judging them as a whole group based on one specific action without knowing anything else about them.

Official definition of prescription drug abuse:

[SIZE=-1][SIZE=-1]"The intentional misuse of a medication outside of the normally accepted standards of its use.[/SIZE][/SIZE]"

Someday, you can maybe become an important bigwig in health policy who will change the definition. Until then, it is what it is.

that definition doesn't contridicte the post you're responding to at all...it doesn't mention anything about how the drug was obtained.
It's accepted standards of use are to increase concentration in a subjective disorder...if you use it to increase your concentration you're using it under it's accepted standards of use...if you're snorting it on the weekends to get high that's another story. Most people who use adderall will use it to study, there are better and cheaper ways to get high.

other definition of drug abuse include...
the overindulgence in and dependence of a drug or other chemical leading to effects that are detrimental to the individual's physical and mental health, or the welfare of others.

The excessive use of a substance, especially alcohol or a drug.

A definition of substance abuse that is frequently cited is that in DSM-IV, the fourth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) issued by the American Psychiatric Association. The DSM-IV definition is as follows:
A. A maladaptive pattern of substance use leading to clinically significant impairment or distress, as manifested by one (or more) of the following, occurring within a 12-month period:

1. Recurrent substance use resulting in a failure to fulfill major role obligations at work, school, or home (e.g., repeated absences or poor work performance related to substance use; substance-related absences, suspensions or expulsions from school; neglect of children or household)
2. Recurrent substance use in situations in which it is physically hazardous (e.g., driving an automobile or operating a machine when impaired by substance use)
3. Recurrent substance-related legal problems (e.g., arrests for substance-related disorderly conduct
4. Continued substance use despite having persistent or recurrent social or interpersonal problems caused or exacerbated by the effects of the substance (e.g., arguments with spouse about consequences of intoxication, physical fights)

 

[halekulani]

😕😕

You really shouldn't assume things...never in any of these posts have I said that I've taken adderall...actually, I believe I've said multiple times that I never have...obviously you need some help in your reading comprehension skills... (and if you aren't specifically refering to me then you need help in your writing skills).

I just think I have absolutely no right to determine what other people should do. If you don't want to take adderall...dont' take it, but it really isn't your place to judge others about the choices they make.

There have actually been a few different situations going around here...one of them is that you shouldn't take adderall without a prescription, another is you shouldn't take it if you don't have ADHD (which is really impossible to know for sure). Why don't you try reading the conversation again so you know what it is you're referring to before you comment.

it's one thing to have an opinion, it's another thing to condemn someone b/c they don't share your views. So again, less judging, more understand.

no it wasn't a comment directed at you literally. it's me typing quickly.

it was an assumption based on the OP's situation. i don't see why the OP would ask about adderall use for an assignment unless he didn't have a prescription and therefore it would be safe to assume he's using it as a study aid.

the topic of the thread is about taking adderall without a prescription specifically in an academic setting (note the OP is specifically asking whether it is cheating)
if you don't have a prescription, what grounds do you have to take it? if you 'claim' it's to treat your 'adhd/narcolepsy', why don't you have a prescription for it already?

if someone chooses to self-medicate without a seeing a doctor, i have little reason to believe they are using the drug as intended.
sure people share antibiotics, but they at least they take it when they're sick.
can't say the same for adderall. ADHD not like the flu. on top of that, adderall is not even an over the counter medication. using it to concentrate is not an acceptable reason/excuse. first and foremost, it is used primarily to treat a diagnosed condition. increase in studying ability is an effect of the drug. in addition, who is to say they are knowledgeable enough to use it appropriately?

if someone chooses to use adderall for their own purposes, they should also claim appropriate responsibility. if they can't handle the heat, don't play with fire.

 

[foster033]

no it wasn't a comment directed at you literally. it's me typing quickly.

it was an assumption based on the OP's situation. i don't see why the OP would ask about adderall use for an assignment unless he didn't have a prescription and therefore it would be safe to assume he's using it as a study aid.

the topic of the thread is about taking adderall without a prescription specifically in an academic setting (note the OP is specifically asking whether it is cheating)
if you don't have a prescription, what grounds do you have to take it? if you 'claim' it's to treat your 'adhd/narcolepsy', why don't you have a prescription for it already?

I have read the entire thread, and although the original question was is using adderall cheating, the topics discussed have digressed significantly from there. If you quote my post and respond to it, then you should read the entire conversation so you know exactly what it is you're responding to.
The questions you asked here have been discussed at length. A prescription is only a legal technicality, it does not make something inherently right or wrong. Laws and Morality are separate things. You need to think for yourself and not just make the argument it's wrong b/c it's illegal. What do you really believe and why? Because it's against the law is not an acceptable moral argument. It's an argument against doing it, but not against why it's wrong.
As for why people don't have a prescription, well there can really be a variety of reasons, I think I've mentioned some before...no health insurance, no prescription coverage, do not take the medicine routinely (most people I know who have a prescription only take it when they need it to study not everyday), are embarrassed about it, etc. etc.

if someone chooses to self-medicate without a seeing a doctor, i have little reason to believe they are using the drug as intended.
sure people share antibiotics, but they at least they take it when they're sick.
can't say the same for adderall. ADHD not like the flu. on top of that, adderall is not even an over the counter medication. using it to concentrate is not an acceptable reason/excuse. first and foremost, it is used primarily to treat a diagnosed condition. increase in studying ability is an effect of the drug. in addition, who is to say they are knowledgeable enough to use it appropriately?

So you're okay with people taking antibiotics they weren't prescribed b/c at least they're 'sick'? Can you prove that someone taking adderall doesn't have ADHD? No, you can't, it's not a provable diagnois that is confirmed by a blood test or anyother kind of quantitative test. It is purely subjective, so just because you think they might not have it doesn't really mean anything, there is no way to tell for sure. If adderall were an over the counter medication it would be okay? why, because someone else decided it was and you go along with them. You say using it to concentrate is not an acceptable reason/excuse, but that is exactly what the drug does, it allows people to concentrate. Anyone who wants to use it properly can...pretty much anything you want to know can be found on the internet.

if someone chooses to use adderall for their own purposes, they should also claim appropriate responsibility. if they can't handle the heat, don't play with fire.

I don't know exactly what this means...
there is definitely a difference between people using adderall to study and people using adderall to get high....
even if you want to qualify both as abuse, you at least need to be able to see that distinction.

 

[JASS92]

Foster-
I just wanted to say I agree with your interpretation regarding therapeutic use of medication. As far as my opinion of drug abuse; everywhere I've seen it documented, and all of the medical professionals I've talked to, agree that simply taking a medication in a manner in which it is not prescribed is abuse. If you are not prescribed the medicine this is logically abuse. There is no need to supply your conjecture regarding the morality of this usage, in fact if anything that results in a decreased ability of the doctor to treat the patient (*cough* Law2doc).

But yeah just thought I would say that, and I found the argument from Law2doc in the prior pages revolting. Not a flame war or anything, but I think theres a reason that he/she forfeited law school. However, just as law requires an unbiased licentious stance in order to correctly address the problem, so does medicine.

 

[foster033]

Foster-
I just wanted to say I agree with your interpretation regarding therapeutic use of medication. As far as my opinion of drug abuse; everywhere I've seen it documented, and all of the medical professionals I've talked to, agree that simply taking a medication in a manner in which it is not prescribed is abuse. If you are not prescribed the medicine this is logically abuse. There is no need to supply your conjecture regarding the morality of this usage, in fact if anything that results in a decreased ability of the doctor to treat the patient (*cough* Law2doc).

I think abuse is a tricky subject...if you look a few post above there are a few definitions I found...most of them mention something about over indulgence in or that the medication interferes with school or work, but they do not say that it's abuse simply b/c you do not have a prescription.

But yeah just thought I would say that, and I found the argument from Law2doc in the prior pages revolting. Not a flame war or anything, but I think theres a reason that he/she forfeited law school.

I was thinking this is well...

 

[Decepticon]

Laws can be ethically moral or immoral. But violating a law is always technically "wrong" because you are violating a societal rule. Which is why we punish for violating laws, not for behaving unethically or immorally. Ethics and morals are the underpinning of laws, so yes in general when something is criminalized, a decision has been made by society that it is "wrong" to do such act. Laws do get overturned (hardly "every day"), but until they do, it is wrong to violate them. Justice is a different concept and has nothing to do with laws. One thing they quickly teach you in law school is that "justice has no place in a court of law". Justice is a concern of legislation and enforcement, not of application. It's about application of the laws that dictates what is right/wrong to do. So yeah, it's a big semantic quagmire. But in fact if you violate a law you are deemed a criminal and will be punished. By most people's definitions, and that of the legislature, what you have done is "wrong", although you can make nonpersuasive and nonwinning arguments that you were acting moral, ethical or just. But you still lose, game over -- you committed a "wrong". So yeah, taking prescription drugs without a prescription is a crime, and thus wrong. doesn't matter that your morals or ethics may remain intact, or if you feel the law is unjust, you are still going to get booked if caught.

Wow, an appeal to authority logical fallacy from a person educated in law. Who would have thought that.🙄

 

[Decepticon]

A definition of substance abuse that is frequently cited is that in DSM-IV, the fourth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) issued by the American Psychiatric Association. The DSM-IV definition is as follows:

I am just gonna add some comments to the DSM in wikipedia-style:

A. A maladaptive pattern of substance use leading to clinically significant[weasel words] impairment or distress, as manifested by one (or more) of the following, occurring within a 12-month period:

1. Recurrent substance use resulting in a failure to fulfill major[vague] role obligations at work, school, or home (e.g., repeated absences or poor work performance[vague] related to substance use; substance-related absences, suspensions or expulsions from school; neglect of children or household)
2. Recurrent substance use in situations in which it is physically hazardous (e.g., driving an automobile or operating a machine when impaired by substance use)
3. Recurrent substance-related legal problems (e.g., arrests for substance-related disorderly conduct
4. Continued substance use despite having persistent or recurrent social or interpersonal problems [vague] caused or exacerbated by the effects of the substance (e.g., arguments with spouse about consequences of intoxication, physical fights)

 

[atomi]

🙄🙄🙄

No coffee, alcohol or over the counter stuff for you then I assume? (It's very common for undiagnosed ADD peeps to unconsciously heavily self-medicate with caffeine.)

How can you possibly compare caffeine or alcohol to adderall? Those are two entirely different things.

Yes, use of caffeine or alcohol in such amounts that they have a medically appreciable effect is not ok. But they are found in common drinks and are consumed by consuming these drinks. It's called moderation.

Adderall is something different. It's something synthetic and un-natural. There is no reason for you to injest it unless you are seeking a desired effect.

Most people illicitly use adderall by crushing and snorting it to bypass the time-release mechanism. There is no responsible use for this drug unless you have debilitating ADD.

It sickens me how much the medical profession over-prescribes and uses medicine as the cure-all instead of telling the f'ing patient to have some personal responsibility. Maybe that is why it is like this, because so many pre-meds are drug abusers.

It's no secret that the medical profession is rampant with drug and alcohol abuse. Why the profession attracts drug users is beyond me, because you think they would be smarter and have more responsibility.

 

[atomi]

Alcohol is a drug that can be just as dangerous as cocaine...does that mean anyone who drinks shouldn't be a doctor in your opinion?

Water is a drug that can be just as dangerous as cocaine too. Does that mean water-users shouldn't be allowed to be doctors?

Your point has no merit. It's not the danger of the substance that is the issue (pretty much everything has an LD50), it's the mind of someone that is driven towards abusing a substance. The criteria for abuse differs with different substances. There is no responsible use of cocaine or adderall or any substance that alters your mind. Altering your mind is not a normal and responsible thing to do. Alcohol can be consumed in non mind-altering quantities as a side ingredient of a drink that tastes good. Nobody snorts just a little bit of cocaine or adderall or smokes a little enough amount of pot so that it has no effect. The whole point of drug use (hence the difference between drinking and drug 'use') is to become intoxicated.

 

[Lacheln]

How can you possibly compare caffeine or alcohol to adderall? Those are two entirely different things.

Yes, use of caffeine or alcohol in such amounts that they have a medically appreciable effect is not ok. But they are found in common drinks and are consumed by consuming these drinks. It's called moderation.

Adderall is something different. It's something synthetic and un-natural. There is no reason for you to injest it unless you are seeking a desired effect.

Most people illicitly use adderall by crushing and snorting it to bypass the time-release mechanism. There is no responsible use for this drug unless you have debilitating ADD.

It sickens me how much the medical profession over-prescribes and uses medicine as the cure-all instead of telling the f'ing patient to have some personal responsibility. Maybe that is why it is like this, because so many pre-meds are drug abusers.

It's no secret that the medical profession is rampant with drug and alcohol abuse. Why the profession attracts drug users is beyond me, because you think they would be smarter and have more responsibility.

Oh, I love the smell of baseless self-righteousness in the morning. Go read up on the topic a bit kid, then we'll discuss.

 

[foster033]

How can you possibly compare caffeine or alcohol to adderall? Those are two entirely different things.

Yes, use of caffeine or alcohol in such amounts that they have a medically appreciable effect is not ok. But they are found in common drinks and are consumed by consuming these drinks. It's called moderation.

Adderall is something different. It's something synthetic and un-natural. There is no reason for you to injest it unless you are seeking a desired effect.

Because alcohol and caffeine are both drugs. Alcohol especially can be abused, very easily and very frequently. Caffeine, as breeak mentioned before can have similar, albeit usually weaker, effects to adderall if taken in high enough doses...this will vary by individual.
Just because something is common like caffeine (caffeine is not naturally found in soda either, it's added to it, look at the ingredients list) or alcohol doesn't make it automatically better or okay, that's a dangerous assumption....you bring up moderation...if people take adderall in moderate dosage is that okay then? Are all things in moderation alright, or just the ones you agree with?

Most drugs are synthetic...does this mean all drugs are bad? Marijuana on the other hand is natural, so it's okay, right?

Generally speaking, all drugs are taken to produce a desired effect, good or bad..if you have a headache I'm sure you take a Tylenol(drug) or something similar to get rid of it(desired effect).

Most people illicitly use adderall by crushing and snorting it to bypass the time-release mechanism. There is no responsible use for this drug unless you have debilitating ADD.

Some people might snort adderall, but not all. Someone correct me if I'm wrong but adderall is sold as instant release tablets (there is also an extended release formula) meaning that very soon after you take them you will feel the effects.
I do agree though that people who are snorting adderall are probably misusing it, but it's not fair to lump these people together those who take it properly.
The problem with saying you can only take it if you have debilitating ADD is that what qualifies as debilitating? You can't really set standards for that with a subjective condition.

It sickens me how much the medical profession over-prescribes and uses medicine as the cure-all instead of telling the f'ing patient to have some personal responsibility. Maybe that is why it is like this, because so many pre-meds are drug abusers.

It's no secret that the medical profession is rampant with drug and alcohol abuse. Why the profession attracts drug users is beyond me, because you think they would be smarter and have more responsibility.

Wow...if you're going to be a doctor you might want to develop a little compassion and understanding. While drug use certainly can be a huge problem telling your patients to man up and f'ing be responsible probably isn't going to help them too much.
Please read above posts for some viewpoints on why some doctors and premed students turn to drugs or alcohol for relief. Contrary to what you may believe, not all people who use drugs are stupid and irresponsible.

Water is a drug that can be just as dangerous as cocaine too. Does that mean water-users shouldn't be allowed to be doctors?

I'm pretty sure water is not a drug. It could be contaminated or have other things in it, but water itself is just good old H2O...

Your point has no merit. It's not the danger of the substance that is the issue (pretty much everything has an LD50), it's the mind of someone that is driven towards abusing a substance. The criteria for abuse differs with different substances. There is no responsible use of cocaine or adderall or any substance that alters your mind. Altering your mind is not a normal and responsible thing to do. Alcohol can be consumed in non mind-altering quantities as a side ingredient of a drink that tastes good. Nobody snorts just a little bit of cocaine or adderall or smokes a little enough amount of pot so that it has no effect. The whole point of drug use (hence the difference between drinking and drug 'use') is to become intoxicated.

Well, I was using alcohol since it's a legal substance that can be abused. There are actually responsible uses of adderall and cocaine...adderall has been discussed at length here and I believe cocaine is still used today as a topical anesthetic..

taken in responsible amounts I don't really see the problem with many drugs...I mean, if you know what you're doing to your body why should I tell you your not allowed...
look up how many drugs became illegal, it usually has very little to do with how dangerous they are and often has a lot to do with racism (seriously, look up some things about cocaine or marijuana).
Anyway, your point is actually the one that has no merit...if you are against using mind altering substance then you must be against caffeine, alcohol, over-the-counter headache medicine, psychiatric meds, depression medication, the list goes on and on...
if you aren't against all that than you need to come up with a better argument than mind-altering is bad...

 

[calnation]

It'd be a scary reality if people actually needed amphetamines to function in society. Luckily society has not become that fast paced yet, though some people may have psyched themselves into believing so.

 

[Decepticon]

I cannot come up with any good argument against methylphenidate than possible long-term risks of prolonged use. I could easily see people getting addicted to it, as the improved performance itself would be seriously positively reinforcing. It is a toss-up between how much you value your health, vs your career. I don't see anything wrong with the cheating part, I regret not having cheated more through high-school myself.

 

[student12x]

Wow. I didn't know that a simple question can engender so many responses. Well I don't really have a clear stance on whether it's cheating or not. But for those that advocate not taking it because it's detrimental to ones health, I would have to say that thats not a good reason to not take it. Most students take adderall for one reason, they usually can't get good grades without it or can't get good grades without spending prodigious amounts of time studying. Lets assume you have a person of average intellect. What does this person have to do to get great grades, by any reasonable definition of great? Well, its likely that this person would have to study obsessively, spending most of his time reading, rereading, doing extra problem sets, attend office hours and tutoring... you get the point. With all the time consumed, its likely that said person gets little social interaction, little sleep, feels overwhelmed etc. So clearly said persons health is worse off than it would have been had he/she didn't aim for those A's. Now lets look that what happens to this person if he/she takes adderall. If said person take the drug, he/she would be able to study more effectively and get the target grades in a shorter time frame. This leaves extra him/her extra time to sleep, make friends, go out and have fun etc. Now, of course he/she would run the risk of becoming addicted, having high blood pressure, losing more weight than is wanted etc. In both cases, getting great grades for a person of merely average intellect, or even below average intellect, becomes detrimental to that person's health. So it's really a matter of picking a poison. Of course my whole argument operates on the need to get great grades. If health>grades, then by all means disregard my position.

 

[Sparda29]

Yeah, I consider it cheating. It's kinda like baseball players taking amphetamines and steroids.

 

[wasteoftime]

What is the cause of ADD (ie how is it definitely diagnosed)?

Bad parenting? 😱
probably accounts for 90% of diagnosed cases...such as lazy parents that would rather get their kid ritalin than take responsibility. relates to the posters original question: taking the easy route instead of working hard.

 

[shawnzy]

pwnd by foster

 

[atomi]

Oh, I love the smell of baseless self-righteousness in the morning. Go read up on the topic a bit kid, then we'll discuss.

So I'm wrong because you say I am? Niiiicceee....

 

[atomi]

Contrary to what you may believe, not all people who use drugs are stupid and irresponsible.

If we're talking about people who use drugs for recreation or performance enhancement, then yes they are stupid and irresponsible, and more importantly they lack the self-confidence needed to be ok with the way they are naturally. Self-confident people are not drug users.

The only responsible use of a drug is when you need it to live and function. If you can function without adderall, then you don't need it. Yes, what constitutes debilitating ADD is very clear-cut. It is whether you can function or not. If you can honestly say it's difficult to determine whether somebody can function or not, give me a break.

I seriously cannot believe you are taking your time to defend the use of adderall for the use of improved studying. You're defending drug abuse; I'm sorry, but that's what it boils down to.

 

[foster033]

So I'm wrong because you say I am? Niiiicceee....

you're not wrong b/c I or anyone else disagree with you, you're wrong because your arguments are simple, lack any type of factual evidence or support and can not be applied broadly, they're also strongly based in emotion and feelings and little else...

If we're talking about people who use drugs for recreation or performance enhancement, then yes they are stupid and irresponsible, and more importantly they lack the self-confidence needed to be ok with the way they are naturally. Self-confident people are not drug users.

I hope you one day find out how sheltered your world view is...
one action that you do not agree with does not make someone stupid and irresponsible nor does it mean that they lack self-confidence. People do all sorts of things to alter the way they are naturally...girls wear make-up to enhance their looks, clothes designed to hide their flaws, fad diets, diet pills, self-tanner, plastic surgery...

More importantly many recreational drug users use drugs simply because they enjoy it...much like a person who does extreme sports enjoy it from the high they get. Sky-diving, base-jumping, kayaking through rapids, rock-climbing...all of these are way more dangerous than sitting in your house on a friday night and lighting up a joint.

As for those who use adderall to study it is not necessarily that they lack confidence in themselves, it generally has much more to do with how others, such as those on an adcom will view them...you can be perfectly happy and know you did your best with a 3.2 GPA and still be realistic and know that might not get you to where you need to be...

I'm not saying the attributes you apply to drug users never true, but it certainly isn't true in all cases. People are individuals and have millions of reasons for doing things. To assign characteristics to a group of people because of one thing the share in common and expect that to apply to all of them is pretty ridiculous.

The only responsible use of a drug is when you need it to live and function. If you can function without adderall, then you don't need it. Yes, what constitutes debilitating ADD is very clear-cut. It is whether you can function or not. If you can honestly say it's difficult to determine whether somebody can function or not, give me a break.

Function under whose definition, yours? It's really not as clear-cut as you seem to think it is. I can function with a headache, but I would function better if I took some tylenol and didn't have a headache anymore...
lots of people with ADD can function, but not necessarily within the constraints of a school environment...does this mean the need medicine to fit the mold society has made or should we let them function outside of "normalcy"...maybe they can do great things that us normal people would have never imagined...the whole point is that ADD is subjective as is the definition of functioning...it's not something that can be quantitatively measured therefore everyone's interruption is going to vary.

I seriously cannot believe you are taking your time to defend the use of adderall for the use of improved studying. You're defending drug abuse; I'm sorry, but that's what it boils down to.

I don't see it as defending drug abuse since I don't think it's a given that people taken medications without a prescription is necessarily drug abuse...
Maybe you should stop and think about why this bothers you so much...it doesn't effect you personal...if you don't want to take adderall don't, but why do you what to control the actions of others?
Also, I probably would defend drug abuse....I think drugs should be legalized...it would reduced crime(drugs would no longer be gang-controlled), free up lots of space in prisons saving tax payers a lot of money(not to mention the money that could be saved by eliminating the useless "war on drugs") and also bring in extra money when drug sales are taxed and the government is able to share in the profits..

 

[Lacheln]

you're not wrong b/c I or anyone else disagree with you, you're wrong because your arguments are simple, lack any type of factual evidence or support and can not be applied broadly, they're also strongly based in emotion and feelings and little else...

Damn skippy.

Atomi, another way of putting it would be to say that from what I've seen of your posts here and on the non-trad board, your capacity for rational thought is so limited that it would be a terrible waste of my time to try to fill the gaping holes in your education. If you care to address them yourself and come back with a little more preparation, I'm happy to listen. In the meantime, congrats, you've made it to the ignore list.

 

[JeanLuc]

Universities should drug screen students on a weekly basis and make the results available to adcoms. Lets say that in terms of med school material I am in the 50th percentile. If someone in the sub-50th percentile group uses regulated stimulants to get above my percentile rank, I will feel cheated. So, IMHO if I use the drugs in the rare instance when it could help me, I am fighting back against the sub-50th doper to prevent him/her from getting ahead of me. Until there is a method of ensuring that no one has an unfair advantage, this will be my way of handling the problem.

I agree with the view that it is the academic equivalent of steroids in sports. We need a method of screening students.

SUGGESTION: When a student enters a Uni give him/her the option of enterring a voluntary program where he/she would do weekly/biweekly drug tests and later have the results disclosed to the adcom. Then, adcoms should give preference to students who enterred this program over those who did not. This is a really simple way to solve the problem and ensure the academic/professional integrity of students and future physicians.

 

[MedicFL]

NO its not cheating, not its not moral.. But there is a saying that if you are not cheating, you are not trying.. Have I done it myself you bet.. My roommate had a script and they worked like a charm... Do I feel any less of the grades I got NOPE.. Why because I still got the grades myself...And as far as Drug abuse goes, if you are taking it for its intended purpose which is to concentrate and you are following the dosing guidelines where is the abuse.. I do suffer from a bit of ADD but not enough to take medication everyday. Abusing a drug is for pleasure and or its not intended medical use.

 

[anomalous738232]

“You have your way. I have my way. As for the right way, the correct way, and the only way, it does not exist.”-- Friedrich Nietzsche

to the op: if you're curious about amphetamine use, google it, and ask your Q's on an amphetamine forum.... i doubt you'll find an answer here that doesn't involve ethical/medical/legal issues & personal opinions.

 

[brianmartin]

Universities should drug screen students on a weekly basis and make the results available to adcoms. Lets say that in terms of med school material I am in the 50th percentile. If someone in the sub-50th percentile group uses regulated stimulants to get above my percentile rank, I will feel cheated. So, IMHO if I use the drugs in the rare instance when it could help me, I am fighting back against the sub-50th doper to prevent him/her from getting ahead of me. Until there is a method of ensuring that no one has an unfair advantage, this will be my way of handling the problem.

You're insane! See below post for explanation 🙂

 

[JeanLuc]

You're insane.

lol. I really didn't think my point of view is that extreme to call it insanity. but okay.

 

[JeanLuc]

You're insane.

I really believe that a voluntary and regular screening program would be a great solution. In the past few minutes that I've been pondering I cannot come up with one reason that could suggest that my solution is in anyway "bad".

 

[brianmartin]

There is no free energy in the universe. Your amphetamine gobbling opponent is paying a price for that high. As someone who has been prescribed amphetamines for ADD in the past, I know the price. For every action there is a reaction. The energy boost you receive comes from the action of the amphetamine, basically a drug induced "fight-or-flight" response extended over 4-6 hours, or even 12 hours with time release preparations. Afterwards the body is left with severely depleted energy reserves, including depressed cerebral glycogen levels, stunted dopaminergic activity. Not to mention tachycardia up to 120's and marked hypertension...the "side" effects really suck and are severe enough to make me seriously think twice before putting any amphetamine in my body. People mistakenly assume amphetamine use is like getting free energy/focus. So it seems kind of ridiculous to impose drug testing on students in order to correct for your perception that amphetamine users are "getting an unfair advantage"--You're not experiencing any of the negative effects. By your logic, everyone should be using amphetamines because they simply "boost performance by XY%". You did say you occasionally used stimulants to "get back" at those who are using them all the time to "gain advantage". However that is strange logic too--daily users face the worst side effects so they can't be getting as much advantage as you think they are.

 

[MedicFL]

I really believe that a voluntary and regular screening program would be a great solution. In the past few minutes that I've been pondering I cannot come up with one reason that could suggest that my solution is in anyway "bad".

You are nuts, that would never fly in the US.. One because it invades privacy
and because it would be a big waste of time.. Most kids in college are not going to medical school so to screen them and then send there results to ADCOMS would just be a big waste of time.. Whos going to pay for this? Have you though about the legal challenges that would arise. And why do you think that someone who is clean should get an edge up for medical school acceptance?

 

[phillySASer08]

I certainly don't agree with any kind of testing plan as outlined earlier; as has been discussed before, there are many gray areas surrounding people who got legitimate prescriptions and whether they actually need them or not, and it would be unfair to discriminate against those who actually have a medical need for the drug (meaning ADD, not being bored by the material or too tired to focus). However, the arguments outlined above against such a policy can most charitably be described as feeble. If med schools wanted to institute a testing program and were willing to put up the money to do so, it would be pretty easy for them to do so (universities doing it for all students may be another matter, but likely they'd be able to legally pull it off too, especially private schools). Cost and bad publicity would be the only two real barriers.

And why do you think that someone who is clean should get an edge up for medical school acceptance?

Um, because they didn't need chemical enhancement to achieve the same things that a similarly qualified student who illegally abused a prescription drug did? Just a guess. Even your wording makes a value judgment in favor of not abusing adderall by calling the non-abusing applicant 'clean.'

 

[MedicFL]

I certainly don't agree with any kind of testing plan as outlined earlier; as has been discussed before, there are many gray areas surrounding people who got legitimate prescriptions and whether they actually need them or not, and it would be unfair to discriminate against those who actually have a medical need for the drug (meaning ADD, not being bored by the material or too tired to focus). However, the arguments outlined above against such a policy can most charitably be described as feeble. If med schools wanted to institute a testing program and were willing to put up the money to do so, it would be pretty easy for them to do so (universities doing it for all students may be another matter, but likely they'd be able to legally pull it off too, especially private schools). Cost and bad publicity would be the only too real barriers.



Um, because they didn't need chemical enhancement to achieve the same things that a similarly qualified student who illegally abused a prescription drug did? Just a guess. Even your wording makes a value judgment in favor of not abusing adderall by calling the non-abusing applicant 'clean.'

By clean I meant other drugs such as pot, ect.... I know a bunch of people that smoke pot and have gone to medical school....I don't consider using adderall for its intended purpose as ABUSE...

 

[TehGaminGurl]

I take Adderall because I have ADD. I got my BS degree WITHOUT the drug and I had a C average yet I was always on the 99th percentile when it came to overall testing areas such as SATs, etc.. I also was in a program for the gifted when younger. So how can I have an overall GPA so low?

I then started to go back for my Masters now and started taking Adderall in June of 2008 and I am SHOCKED at the vast difference in how well I am able to concentrate, study and actually retain the information I spend hours studying. In the past, before the medication, I would study just as hard for just as long and retain very little. But now my grades are already in the A/B category. For me, Adderall brings me up to the level that others without ADD can be at with just hard work and effort and therefore levels the playing field.

If you use it and you don't need it, your test scores aren't a reflection of how smart you are, or how well you behaved responsibly by studying, or by doing all your work, or really understanding the concepts, or especially how worthy you are of the job your degree gets you. Your grade is really a reflection of how good the cheat method is that you used over another. So that 'A' someone may get is an 'A' for the method of cheating they used (hidden notes, copying from another student, using Adderall) rather than their true worth.

 

[Slowpoke]

I don't see how this thread went for as long as it did.