3 ms·

Let me unpack what you're saying here. Note that I have not surveyed the literature, but I am slightly skeptical of ADHD as a diagnosis, having seen "early det

Let me unpack what you're saying here. Note that I have not surveyed the literature, but I am slightly skeptical of ADHD as a diagnosis, having seen "early detection/intervention" results amongst the children of my peers that seem patently ridiculous. > There is actual neurological evidence that those with ADHD have mismatching development of their motor cortex and their PFC which controls the executive functioning of the brain That is to say that the set of people diagnosed with ADHD correlates to the set of people who have mismatching development. But the tests for ADHD (especially in early childhood) do not undergo any sort of PET or fMRI scans for mismatched development; they typically have a set of questions that they ask with a threshold for the number of "wrong" answers. I suspect (without evidence) that as the testing moves earlier in age, there is more "success" with early intervention simply because the condition is transient. In situation where intervention is recommended, I think overreactions are common and doing large-scale studies to determine how effective the questionnaires are at rooting out both positive and negative findings of "mismatched development" through directly measurable means like fMRIs or PET scans, which are contraindicated in non-acute cases for children of the ages in question, so we have to have longer-term survey studies before we can begin to evaluate effectiveness. The age-related results referenced in the article (thought I haven't read the study) seem to indicate that at least some of the ad hoc testing is just measuring normal childhood development milestones rather than serving as a useful indicator of ADHD.

jonhendry18 8y ago
" But the tests for ADHD (especially in early childhood) do not undergo any sort of PET or fMRI scans for mismatched development;" That's not the entirety of the diagnostic process. Also, you may be putting more faith in PET and fMRI than they deserve. https://harvardneuro.wordpress.com/2016/01/21/tbt-the-lessons-we-learned-from-a-dead-fish/ https://harvardneuro.wordpress.com/2016/01/21/tbt-the-lesson...
WhompingWindows 8y ago
It's not a transient condition, like an infection, it develops over time as the brain matures. To call it transient implies that it's fleeting/ephemeral, and having met people diagnosed in their 60's crying because they finally understand why the struggled in life, I saw first-hand that it is not transient. So, developmental means that it's not present at age 1, but by age 7, it must have become present. Otherwise, we're looking at anxiety or depression or something else. Even those diagnosed with ADHD as adults, one of the stipulations is that they MUST have had symptoms before age 7, though admittedly the DSM versions have changed regarding this point (side note: this is part of the reason the diagnosis is seen as trendy/over-done recently, because subsequent DSM versions have changed it up quite a bit, from what was called minimal brain dysfunction in the 50's to ADD to ADHD these days). Anyway, the gold standard diagnosis in children is about functional deficits in multiple settings. It's the following: can you remember the items you need every day, can you focus on school, do you lose things, are you disruptive in class, can you keep your seat, are you hyperactive w.r.t. your motor activity? If you have enough deficits, you are diagnosed. These deficits are observed in school, at home, and in as many settings/by as many people as is practical. It's not about expensive scans, which would be impractical and costly. It's all about functional deficits, problems in life. I merely bring up the neurology because it's important for skeptics to understand there is a real, scientifically proven difference in the brains of those with ADHD.
roguecoder 8y ago
Early intervention may in fact be able to mitigate the symptoms, support earlier development of compensating skills and possibly make future treatment unnecessary. That should be considered a success, not cast doubt on the original diagnosis.

jonhendry18 8y ago

" But the tests for ADHD (especially in early childhood) do not undergo any sort of PET or fMRI scans for mismatched development;" That's not the entirety of the diagnostic process. Also, you may be putting more faith in PET and fMRI than they deserve. https://harvardneuro.wordpress.com/2016/01/21/tbt-the-lessons-we-learned-from-a-dead-fish/ https://harvardneuro.wordpress.com/2016/01/21/tbt-the-lesson...

WhompingWindows 8y ago

It's not a transient condition, like an infection, it develops over time as the brain matures. To call it transient implies that it's fleeting/ephemeral, and having met people diagnosed in their 60's crying because they finally understand why the struggled in life, I saw first-hand that it is not transient. So, developmental means that it's not present at age 1, but by age 7, it must have become present. Otherwise, we're looking at anxiety or depression or something else. Even those diagnosed with ADHD as adults, one of the stipulations is that they MUST have had symptoms before age 7, though admittedly the DSM versions have changed regarding this point (side note: this is part of the reason the diagnosis is seen as trendy/over-done recently, because subsequent DSM versions have changed it up quite a bit, from what was called minimal brain dysfunction in the 50's to ADD to ADHD these days). Anyway, the gold standard diagnosis in children is about functional deficits in multiple settings. It's the following: can you remember the items you need every day, can you focus on school, do you lose things, are you disruptive in class, can you keep your seat, are you hyperactive w.r.t. your motor activity? If you have enough deficits, you are diagnosed. These deficits are observed in school, at home, and in as many settings/by as many people as is practical. It's not about expensive scans, which would be impractical and costly. It's all about functional deficits, problems in life. I merely bring up the neurology because it's important for skeptics to understand there is a real, scientifically proven difference in the brains of those with ADHD.

roguecoder 8y ago

Early intervention may in fact be able to mitigate the symptoms, support earlier development of compensating skills and possibly make future treatment unnecessary. That should be considered a success, not cast doubt on the original diagnosis.