Drugging Kids

"Jan" wrote in message
ups.com...

http://www.berkeley.edu/news/media/r.../09_adhd.shtml

This is the article, my comments are noted:

Researchers receive $900,000 grant to study use of psychostimulants to treat
ADHD

By Sarah Yang, Media Relations | 09 March 2004

BERKELEY - A $900,000 federal grant over the next three years will help
researchers at the University of California, Berkeley, understand the
economic issues and policy decisions surrounding the use of medications to
treat attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), the most commonly
diagnosed behavioral disorder in children today.

According to a 2002 report by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention, more than 3.5 percent of school-age children in the country are
diagnosed with ADHD, and more than half of them regularly take
psychostimulant medication, predominantly Ritalin or its longer-acting
formulations.

COMMENT: Let's do the math....hmmm...half of 3.5% is 1.75%...and more than
half are on meds. Goes along with the statewide Maryland study witch found
2.46%. If one would listen to Jan and her ilk, one would think that the
numbers were 100% and 1000%.

Previous studies have found that, between 1990 and 2001, the number of
people, mostly children, diagnosed with ADHD grew fivefold from 900,000 to
4.5 million. That rise roughly coincided with policy changes from the
Department of Education that allowed children with ADHD to receive special
accommodations at school.

COMMENT: I have heard that before. I wonder where? Oh, that is right, I said
it. Imagine that!

There has also been concurrent growth in the use of psychostimulant
medications to treat the disorder, with the number of prescriptions for
Ritalin and related drugs rising at least 50 percent in the past decade.

"Whether these drugs are being overused or underused is a subject of intense
debate," said Richard Scheffler, UC Berkeley professor of health economics
and public policy and principal investigator of the grant. "We expect this
research to provide some solid data so that parents, educators and
clinicians can better meet the needs of children with ADHD."

COMMENT: Hmmm...it is a matter of debate and not as clear cut as Jan has
implied.

The grant from the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) will support
market analysis of the economic, demographic, state regulatory, school
policy, health system and other factors influencing the supply and demand
for psychostimulants. The researchers will track shipments of the drugs to
the pharmacies dispensing them to better understand which communities are
utilizing the psychostimulants, and why that use varies greatly from one
region to the next.

In addition, the investigators will have access to records of an estimated
14,000 children enrolled with Kaiser Permanente's Northern California
practice to obtain a more detailed picture of those who are diagnosed with
ADHD, including information on race, ethnicity, birth characteristics,
family history and place of residence.

In response to the controversy over the use of medication for ADHD, some
states have enacted laws that limit the extent to which schools can pressure
parents to put their children on psychostimulants. In Connecticut, for
example, it is now illegal for school staff members to discuss ADHD drug
treatments with parents, and similar legislation has been introduced in at
least five other states.

COMMENT: Mixing politics and medicine. Smart. Not.

It may not be surprising, then, that use of these treatments varies
dramatically across state and city borders. Data from the federal Drug
Enforcement Agency show that distribution rates of psychostimulant drugs
vary up to threefold across states and tenfold within states. Studies have
also found that in some communities, 10 to 20 percent of school children are
receiving psychostimulants for ADHD compared with almost no children in
other areas.

COMMENT: One of those studies with large numbers has been withdrawn due to a
mathematical error.

"What's going on here is either an epidemic or an incredible uncertainty
about ADHD diagnosis, and we ought to be concerned about it," said
Scheffler, who is also director of UC Berkeley's Petris Center on Healthcare
Markets and Consumer Welfare.

For the project, Scheffler is collaborating with Stephen Hingham, UC
Berkeley professor of psychology and one of the country's leading experts on
the causes, treatments and long-term outcomes of ADHD.

"Because ADHD is a behavioral and emotional disorder that is based in the
brain, some people are skeptical of the diagnosis - which does not involve a
cut-and-dried blood test - and of the use of drugs to treat it," said
Hinshaw, co-principal investigator of the grant. "The rates of medication
for childhood asthma have also increased dramatically in the last 20 years,
but we don't hear a public outcry about aggressive treatment for asthma the
way we do for ADHD."

COMMENT: this is explained as people can see asthma and cannot "see AD/HD"
as they prefer to blame parents.

Yet, making sure children with ADHD get proper treatment is just as
critical, said Hinshaw. He points out that when ADHD is left untreated, it
can have a significant impact on the child's future growth and development.

COMMENT: Just like I have said.

"Used correctly, medications may help correct abnormal brain development,"
said Hinshaw. "Used incorrectly, they may be adding to the problems, so this
needs to be studied very carefully."

Studies have shown that untreated children with ADHD have a higher risk for
delinquency, school failure, underemployment and accidental injuries than do
their non-disordered peers.

COMMENT: Another point that has been repeatedly made and Jan repeated
ignores or denies.

"The time to treat ADHD is when the child is still young and when the brain
is developing very quickly," said Hinshaw. "These are kids that deserve the
best treatments available, and we need to make sure they are delivered
equitably, and with quality care. The stakes are too high for us not to."

COMMENT: Jan would not be happy if this is done.

Other investigators for the grant are Teh-wei Hu, Susan Stone and Ying Qing
Chen from UC Berkeley; Laurel Habel from the Kaiser Foundation Research
Institute; and Farasat Bokhari from Florida State University.

Your point?

Twittering One wrote:
Your point?

fubar, perhaps?

"Twittering One" wrote in message
oups.com...
Your point?

There are good articles out there.

Ms. Drew posts articles without reading them, as I am sure she would never
post one which refutes everything she claims.

"Your point?"
~ Moi

"fubar, perhaps?"
~ Raving

"Pooh Bear?
Or Grande Papa?"
~ Moi

"Your point?'
~ Moi

"There are good articles out there.
Ms. Drew posts articles without reading them,
As I am sure she would never
Post one which refutes
Everything she claims."
~ Mark

"Draw? Ms.
New? Elaine's my English teacher,
Too!"
~ Moi

Newsgroups: alt.support.attn-deficit, misc.health.alternative,
misc.kids.health
From: "Mark Probert" Mark - Find messages by
this author
Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2005 13:02:25 -0500
Local: Thurs, Feb 10 2005 10:02 am
Subject: Drugging Kids
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show
original | Report Abuse



"Twittering One" wrote in message


oups.com...


Your point?


There are good articles out there.

Yes, many.

Ms. Drew posts articles without reading them,

Mark is rather arrogant, he has no idea what I read.

However we all know he doesn't read, just posts of the top of his head
and calls his lies facts.

I am sure she would never
post one which refutes everything she claims.

That also a proven lie.

Nothing unusal for Mark the pathetic liar.

Jan

Mark Probert wrote:
"Twittering One" wrote in message
oups.com...
Your point?

There are good articles out there.

Ms. Drew posts articles without reading them, as I am sure she would
never
post one which refutes everything she claims.

I had a brief look and she indeed seems to be a very, very
cautions/pedantic person. I don't mean "such" as disrespect. ... just a
partial obsrvation.

What you suggest seems in keeping with such.

Jan wrote:
Newsgroups: alt.support.attn-deficit, misc.health.alternative,
misc.kids.health
From: "Mark Probert" Mark - Find messages
by
this author
Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2005 13:02:25 -0500
Local: Thurs, Feb 10 2005 10:02 am
Subject: Drugging Kids
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show
original | Report Abuse



"Twittering One" wrote in message


oups.com...


Your point?


There are good articles out there.

Yes, many.

Ms. Drew posts articles without reading them,

Mark is rather arrogant, he has no idea what I read.

However we all know he doesn't read, just posts of the top of his
head
and calls his lies facts.

I am sure she would never
post one which refutes everything she claims.

That also a proven lie.

Nothing unusal for Mark the pathetic liar.

Jan

Jan writes -

"Mark is rather arrogant, he has no idea what I read."

Mark may have an idea of some of the things which you might read as
evinced by a search with "Google", for example.

On the other hand, you are very correct to point out that this is 'at
best' an exceedingly 'sparse' sampling of what you actually read; ..
that 'sampling' by such a method is an unfair 'representation'.

I had a brief look at some of your posts. You would seem to be a very
'careful' , deliberate and purposeful sort of person.

Is my estimation a fair one? ... Is it the only 'summarization'? Who
knows? My look-see was certainly, most prefunctory.

the Raving Loonie

Please use the Google feature which allows for proper quoting.

thank you.

"Jan" wrote in message
oups.com...
Newsgroups: alt.support.attn-deficit, misc.health.alternative,
misc.kids.health
From: "Mark Probert" Mark - Find messages by
this author
Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2005 13:02:25 -0500
Local: Thurs, Feb 10 2005 10:02 am
Subject: Drugging Kids
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show
original | Report Abuse



"Twittering One" wrote in message


oups.com...


Your point?


There are good articles out there.

Yes, many.

Ms. Drew posts articles without reading them,

Mark is rather arrogant, he has no idea what I read.

However we all know he doesn't read, just posts of the top of his head
and calls his lies facts.

I am sure she would never
post one which refutes everything she claims.

That also a proven lie.

Nothing unusal for Mark the pathetic liar.

Jan