Yeah, but while they might not be convinced, some stranger that needs this information may stumble across it -- and it may do them good to read it. ADHD is no joke and stimulant medications are vitally important, as one component, in the treatment of ADHD.
Incredibly false. see my comments below, there are way more potential risks that should out weigh any potential benefits, there are non-stimulant based treatments for ADHD that are just as effective and don't require you to play russian roulette with your sanity. Your comment is ill informed and incredibly dangerous.
I did notice that, but as others have pointed out, the rest of the audience is likely more important than the idiosyncratic biases of the OP.
The OP message of "big pharma is lying to us!" is an appealing one for many people. Pointing out that, in fact, there is serious scientific evidence to the contrary on that exact topic is "worth trying".
Otherwise, if we just abandon the concept of rational thought, we end up with people like the current president of the US, the guy in charge of Health and Human Services, and so on. There are, as philosophers put it, "facts of the matter", and we need to keep reminding people of that if we want to even achieve the minimal level of valid response shown in the movie Idiocracy. Currently, the United States is not actually achieving that level.
Yeah, but while they might not be convinced, some stranger that needs this information may stumble across it -- and it may do them good to read it. ADHD is no joke and stimulant medications are vitally important, as one component, in the treatment of ADHD.
Incredibly false. see my comments below, there are way more potential risks that should out weigh any potential benefits, there are non-stimulant based treatments for ADHD that are just as effective and don't require you to play russian roulette with your sanity. Your comment is ill informed and incredibly dangerous.
Thats strong advice. Where did you get your medical degree amd where can we read your research?
Obviously it must be vast, or you wouldn't be able to make sweeping claims that contradict soo much evidence to the contrary.
> you will never convince me otherwise
I suppose its good to have a religion.
I did notice that, but as others have pointed out, the rest of the audience is likely more important than the idiosyncratic biases of the OP.
The OP message of "big pharma is lying to us!" is an appealing one for many people. Pointing out that, in fact, there is serious scientific evidence to the contrary on that exact topic is "worth trying".
Otherwise, if we just abandon the concept of rational thought, we end up with people like the current president of the US, the guy in charge of Health and Human Services, and so on. There are, as philosophers put it, "facts of the matter", and we need to keep reminding people of that if we want to even achieve the minimal level of valid response shown in the movie Idiocracy. Currently, the United States is not actually achieving that level.
Well good on you for having the wherewithal for such an interaction. Keep fighting the good fight.
Comment conversations are public; “everybody else” is part of the conversation.