Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Amphetamine use in America's workforce

daily.jstor.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 261 posts

Re: Amphetamine use in America's workforce

#111

Post by eridius »

llamataboot wrote: post #86
eridius wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You seem to be equating therapeutic doses of amphetamines with recreational doses (i.e. overdosing). The amount of amphetamines people take for recreational purposes or for those all-nighters and whatnot are more than what people take for medicinal purposes. So it's not some magical bright line that makes amphetamines good for some people and bad for others. But it is a condition that makes therapeutic doses benefici…

#1) Let's get specific about our dosages then. I know people prescribed 60mg of adderall a day. And lots of people prescribed 40mg. I guarantee if you give a person with no amphetamine tolerance 40 mg of adderall (yes, even if you split it into two doses) they are going to know they are on some speed. In fact, most people I know that use adderall "recreationally" (whether for pleasure or productivity -- that is they…

#1) Yes, if you give someone with no prior experience 40mg, that's going to have a significant effect. Someone who's prescribed that amount is done so because they've built up a tolerance. Just because 40mg may be an appropriate therapeutic dosage for one person doesn't mean it's considered a therapeutic dosage for everyone. Also, you said this was the amount per day that was prescribed; are they taking one dose of XR or two doses of non-XR? 60mg per day sounds very high for someone taking one dose of XR (15-30mg is much more common), but if it's really 2 doses of 30mg of non-XR, then that's different.

#2) I agree that ADHD is a complex subject and diagnosing is hard. However, given that something like 80% of people with ADHD show improvement with amphetamines, I'm not sure what the point is of this line of argument. Even if ADHD really is a cluster of similar issues, if they all can be treated the same way, then it doesn't really matter whether it's a single issue or multiple.

I'm not sure why you're trying to draw a comparison with depression. The only real connection here is that they're both psychiatric diagnoses, but beyond that they're not the same at all.

> But I doubt you can find me any study showing that we've ever seen so many people on high-dose daily amphetamines from a young age through adulthood until the past decade or so.

That's completely irrelevant. Why would you want a study looking at the number of people being prescribed? There's nothing you can conclude from the fact that more people are taking it now than before, because the number of people taking it has no relevance to its long-term effects. All that really matters is whether a statistically significant number of people have been taking it, and that's certainly been true.

Re: Amphetamine use in America's workforce

#113

Post by sanoli »

Vraxx wrote: post #9

I think this is a little bit sensationalized at the very least. This excerpt in particular caught me off guard. "Abuse by young professionals is distressingly common—Wall Street traders, software engineers, dentists, nurses, and lawyers, all cracked out of their minds trying to keep up with the competition." Yes, I was diagnosed with ADHD as a child, and yes I have an Adderall prescription. But I'd hardly call myself…

By the way, why would dentists be "cracked out" on amphetamines? Is it a very competitive field or are the hours terrible for a dentist in the US? (I also thought it was a bit over the top, but the dentist in the example stuck out even more for me -- I don't live in the US, and the dentists I've known had pretty normal, non-stressful work lives.)

Re: Amphetamine use in America's workforce

#114

Post by bpchaps »

ta_339393 wrote: post #108
lfowles wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's probably all about dose. Just takes more for an ADHD individual to be affected the same.

Metabolism plays a big role in determining the effective dose. There are people who can take what are considered high therapeutic doses and feel very little effects because of the way their body metabolizes the chemical, which of course has nothing to do with whether they have ADHD or not.

For sure. I take adderall and have an incredibly high metabolism to the point of needing to add 1500 calories per day in protein shakes to stay at a healthy weigh.

7.5mg (15mg in half) is my usual dosage, but it's strong enough to fill me with the energy you'd expect someone on a high dosage to have. When I talk a full pill, it completely screws me over. Others can take 30mg and be completely fine.

Re: Amphetamine use in America's workforce

#115

Post by HarryHirsch »

md224 wrote: post #26
Vraxx wrote: post #9

I think this is a little bit sensationalized at the very least. This excerpt in particular caught me off guard. "Abuse by young professionals is distressingly common—Wall Street traders, software engineers, dentists, nurses, and lawyers, all cracked out of their minds trying to keep up with the competition." Yes, I was diagnosed with ADHD as a child, and yes I have an Adderall prescription. But I'd hardly call myself…

Agreed. I was struck by the same line, "cracked out of their minds"... very biased. I don't know if "abuse" used to have a coherent meaning, but these days it boils down to "used in a way I don't like". Drug use is certainly a mixed bag but it deserves a balanced treatment, not scare tactics. The article even goes on to list great accomplishments that were made possible (or at least supported) by drug use. Talk about…

Wonderfully contrarian? I'd disagree, in fact I'd maintain that what the lady does is not science. How can you argue medical ethics, a subject firmly rooted in observable, shared reality, from first principles and then disregard outcomes? If you intend to do science uou can't omit to check dogma against reality, perhaps those dogmata are no good at all to describe the world.

Very telling is another publication of hers, about Obamacare. From the abstract: "Though states are morally required to provide citizens with access to affordable health care, states must also take care not to violate important economic liberties .. ." Where do the "economic liberties" even come from? Everyone knows that US healthcare costs are an outlier in the civilized world, and the ostensible goal of Obamacare was to fix that. And if we have to talk about the principle of economic liberty we also have to consider the observable phenomenon of decision fatigue.

This is not science, this is libertarian apologetics. There is a purpose for that but it needs to be clearly distinguished as such.

Re: Amphetamine use in America's workforce

#116

Post by iumtuip2001 »

Havoc wrote: post #89
WalterSear wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd also not recommend melatonin, but not for the reason that the other poster gave, which suggest that they are taking melatonin in the amounts that it is formulated at pharmacies, which is usually orders of magnitude that of the recommended dose, and probably too late in the evening (>Don't However, after taking it for several years on most days, I developed heart palpitations and other strange sensations. They dis…

>I'd also not recommend melatonin Yeah I'm aware that its not ideal. Come to think of it I actually told myself I'd stop once peak season is over so I guess thats now. First need to get rid of the coffee though then the falling asleep will be fine. >take it ~3 hours before going to bed I thought 1 hour?

How much coffee are you drinking?

Some intense exercise (7+ mile runs) will wipe you out. I'd recommend you keep the coffee, and get your body moving. Allocate 1 hour of your day, to 120+ bpm workouts.

Just TRY not to sleep.

Re: Amphetamine use in America's workforce

#117

Post by iumtuip2001 »

ta_339393 wrote: post #73
Lewton wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought giving people adhd meds and seeing whether it relaxes them was a pretty good (not perfect) indicator? Am I wrong?

That's not true, I have ADHD and I still feel stimulated when I take my medicine just like anyone else would. The difference is that it also gives me symptom relief as well. Over time you will develop more of a tolerance to these stimulating effects, at least to a degree, but the therapeutic benefits will continue for as long as you take them.

For what it's worth, I have ADHD, and when I take adderal it has a profound mellowing, and calming effect.

I don't take it in the morning for that reason. Because it has zero stimulation / awakeness effect on me, I wait to use it in the afternoon, when sleep inertia has fully dissipated.

Re: Amphetamine use in America's workforce

#118

Post by brbsix »

HarryHirsch wrote: post #115
md224 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. I was struck by the same line, "cracked out of their minds"... very biased. I don't know if "abuse" used to have a coherent meaning, but these days it boils down to "used in a way I don't like". Drug use is certainly a mixed bag but it deserves a balanced treatment, not scare tactics. The article even goes on to list great accomplishments that were made possible (or at least supported) by drug use. Talk about…

Wonderfully contrarian? I'd disagree, in fact I'd maintain that what the lady does is not science. How can you argue medical ethics, a subject firmly rooted in observable, shared reality, from first principles and then disregard outcomes? If you intend to do science uou can't omit to check dogma against reality, perhaps those dogmata are no good at all to describe the world. Very telling is another publication of her…

> states are morally required to provide citizens with access to affordable health care

There may be other indications (I haven't checked), but that statement doesn't sound even remotely libertarian. The moral requirement to provide affordable health care is a positive right (something that obliges action). Contrast this to a negative right, something that obliges inaction, such as free speech or private property. Libertarians generally don't acknowledge positive rights (unless by contract, but then we're talking about something else).

Re: Amphetamine use in America's workforce

#119

Post by hosh »

A lot of people are taking issue with what's called sensationalism in the article.

I think that's ignoring the elephant in the room. Before amphetamines, it was other drugs. The major point is that practice of capitalism in America is founded on a pattern of use and abuse of drugs. This is an elephant in the room because the dearly-held narrative in America is the idea of work hard, get rewarded. What's called a good work ethic here is seen as insane working hours outside of the US. And this ethos is reinforced by the dominance of US interest in the world.

Now you add in the Chinese startups working even more insane hours.

Is this really what we want our human civilization to move towards? This blind, tunnel-vision obsession over technological progress without actually reflecting on where it is that we are going?

Well, at least when you're using drugs that help you focus, these inconvenient ideas can be easily dismissed. Back to work now, y'all.

Post reply on HN