14 ms·

Many of the respondents to this informal poll classified coffee or other energy drinks as a stimulant, so not surprised by this. 64% of Americans drink coffee

Many of the respondents to this informal poll classified coffee or other energy drinks as a stimulant, so not surprised by this. 64% of Americans drink coffee every day. This would have been more interesting if antidepressant usage were isolated.

limeblack 8y ago
Yes. Considering many psych drugs are well disqualifying reasons for becoming certain doctors, you either need to do it off the record or not at all.
- sjg007 8y ago
  So you are saying a disability is disqualifying to be a doctor? No that is not correct.
  - limeblack 8y ago
    Certain types. It talks about this is in the article about your medical board not being your friend. Medical doctors, lawyer, police officers, military have strict requirements about even antidepressants and you can be disqualified from having just taken them.
    - sjg007 8y ago
      No you are wrong. That would be against the Americans with disabilities act.
      - pard68 8y ago
        ADA has limits. You can't be in the military if you are missing a limb. Can't be a police officer if you have mental issues. There are common sense limits to ADA.
      - zrobotics 8y ago
        So wait, I could have been an air force pilot after all, and their annoying eyesight and physical requirements are illegal? That is absolutely ridiculous, the ADA doesn't imply that anyone with any disability needs to be accommodated for any job, just that reasonable accommodation be made. For instance, someone in a wheelchair will be unable to do many jobs, regardless of accommodation,such as framing carpentry and roofing. As someone who has gotten ADA accommodations related to mental health, there are absolutely limits. Due to my hand tremors, no hospital in the nation would allow me to be a surgeon, regardless of qualifications. Ditto for police departments, due to said mental-health issues.
        MaxBarraclough 8y ago
        Here in the UK at least, the military is one of the very few exceptions to the disabilities laws. I believe even the police are subject to the disabilities laws, the medical profession too. In which case they most likely can't even ask. (Not a lawyer, just a bumbling Internet commentator, you'd be insane to take me seriously, etc)
        afpx 8y ago
        I think the vast majority of people would agree with you. Clearly, some jobs require certain physical attributes. However, which jobs would a person with a psychiatric disorder be disqualified for? Couldn’t one argue that all jobs that require a brain would be off-limits? Probably not, but where is the line drawn?
        madengr 8y ago
        Anything that requires a security clearance.
        ams6110 8y ago
        And that is as much because of the potential for the condition to be used for blackmail as it is any real limits it imposes on the work you would be doing. And for some jobs, e.g. you want to work undercover for the CIA as a field agent, your mental state is not what would be strictly considered normal.
    - actualdc1 8y ago
      Doctor here. Can confirm this to be completely incorrect.
      - riahi 8y ago
        I respectfully disagree. Disclosing these things makes your life a living hell. https://www.acepnow.com/article/emergency-physician-with-depression-chronicles-her-10-year-fight-to-keep-her-license/?fbclid=IwAR1dvJldVBEhy1vgMi1k0wMVaV4G0JQrJfQMrlE28QsmRK99fWCRrDZDdPg https://www.acepnow.com/article/emergency-physician-with-dep... (Reddit thread discussing that article) https://www.reddit.com/r/medicine/comments/aaappq/emergency_physician_chronicles_her_ten_year_fight/ https://www.reddit.com/r/medicine/comments/aaappq/emergency_...
      - deleted 8y ago
        [deleted]
      - skh 8y ago
        My wife is a psychiatrist and sees a psychiatrist off the record because she’s afraid of the stigma affecting her career. It’s just one data point but I find it telling that a psychiatrist is afraid that other psychiatrists will know she takes med to treat a psychiatric condition. Hers is anxiety related.
        analog31 8y ago
        In my view it's pretty widespread that people are hesitant to seek certain kinds of care because of the potential effect of a "pre existing condition" on their employability.
        dorchadas 8y ago
        Exactly. I don't think it's because the medical board itself would stop them, but more because the stigma attached to it would lead to people questioning them and their ability to do their job, not to mention the issues with insurance. I'd say that likely has a lot more to do with doctors wanting to see others off-the-record... I know of some teachers who do the same thing with psychiatrists, because they don't want it getting out to the students' parents.
  - SkyPuncher 8y ago
    > So you are saying a disability is disqualifying to be a doctor? No that is not correct. No, you are wrong. Mental health among doctors is a huge issue in the field right now. In some states having a recorded case of depression is enough for you to have a license review. Behind closed doors everyone will tell you to lie about your mental history. If you need help, you better make damn sure you're going to someone who will take cash and not keep any records of your appointments. Doctors are literally having their entire careers put at risk because they admit they're human.
  - markroseman 8y ago
    Varies by jurisdiction, but there are a lot of places, including many areas in the USA, where this is very much an issue, affecting licensing and credentialing. Would it survive a court challenge? Probably not, but I don't know a lot of doctors who would take the risk of reputation, career prospects, lost income, etc. to find out.
infotogivenm 8y ago
Came here to say this. From the med students I know, I would have guessed 100%.
village-idiot 8y ago
Indeed, this is a very misleading title. Medical researchers might understand that caffeine is a stimulant, but as a layperson I assumed they meant aderall or similar.
- criddell 8y ago
  How were you mislead? What difference does it make if it's a prescription stimulant?
  - insertnickname 8y ago
    Prescription stimulants like amphetamine and methylphenidate are more potent than caffeine. What if the headline had said "75 % of med students are on drugs" but actually it just means that 75 % of med students occasionally take acetaminophen or aspirin for headaches? Those are indeed drugs, but wouldn't you feel misled? People drinking coffee is not newsworthy, so one wouldn't expect an article about it. I haven't looked at the data the article is based on, so I don't know if something like this is what's going on, but I think this is the point village-idiot was trying to make.
    - hvindin 8y ago
      No shit speed and meth are stronger than coffee. I don't think that was the point being made. Or at least its probably safe to assume the commenter you are replying to didn't indend to imply that. Sorry to be do blunt but casually ignoring things like modafinil which seems to be the go to drug for staving off sleep if you want to be able to pass drug tests is a bit of a mistake. Subjectivly most users of modafinil find it "weaker" than coffee because there is no rush associated with it as there is with coffee, you just can't sleep when you take it. So if the point you're making is actually just virtue signalling with the "well some drugs are worse than others because I guess they are classified as controlled?" bullshit then please provide an actual reason why the comment was disagreeable.
      - natalyarostova 8y ago
abnry 8y ago
You dug into the sources? The author of the linked article wrote, "I discovered that 75% of med students (and new doctors) are now on psychiatric medications." That seems to exclude caffeine from coffee.
- DevX101 8y ago
  The article is based on a collection of anecdotes from responses to a Facebook question: “75% of med students and residents are taking either stimulants or antidepressants or both. True or false?” Ctrl-f for 'coffee' to see some sample responses.
Synaesthesia 8y ago
If you’ve ever had Ritalin, or amphetamine you’ll know it’s a different kettle of fish to coffee.
- crankylinuxuser 8y ago
  I drink large amounts of coffee. Previously, I bought a 4oz jar of anhydrous caffeine powder. I've also been on 10mg BID amphetamine. To compare the 2, the amphetamine feels more artificial bodily wise. However ingesting about 500mg caffeine has the similar bodily feel as 10mg amphetamine. Given the amphetamine did some tricks like time delayed whereas the caffeine did not, does make it harder to compare. The caffeine did stay just as long, and provided a much longer bodily high. These days, I just drink coffee and stay away from pills and powder. Safer.
  - whalesalad 8y ago
    I don't really know how anyone could honestly compare caffeine and amphetamines. One is like a knife and the other is like a 50 cal machine gun, as far as stimulation goes. There is a reason amphetamines are a schedule II drug and caffeine is not.
    - roel_v 8y ago
      It's about dosage. 5 mg of amphetamines is really just a bit a boost. Of course if you start cutting lines and snort them to keep awake and dancing until noon the next day, it's a different story.
    - crankylinuxuser 8y ago
      > I don't really know how anyone could honestly compare caffeine and amphetamines. They are both stimulants. I've done both, like I said. So yes, for my body (n=1) I can indeed compare them. And it was sincere and honest. And the only reason why caffeine isn't schedule 2 is the same reason why alcohol and nicotine isn't either. That's purely a societal reason, and no basis in chemistry. If caffeine/coffee was discovered last year, it would be schedule drug. Look no further than kratom.
drb91 8y ago
Coffee is quite stimulating by itself, an addiction can probably ruin your life via sleep and anxiety. I’m fine with it being classified as a stimulant, although I wish they pulled caffeine out into its own category.

limeblack 8y ago

Yes. Considering many psych drugs are well disqualifying reasons for becoming certain doctors, you either need to do it off the record or not at all.

sjg007 8y ago
So you are saying a disability is disqualifying to be a doctor? No that is not correct.
- limeblack 8y ago
  Certain types. It talks about this is in the article about your medical board not being your friend. Medical doctors, lawyer, police officers, military have strict requirements about even antidepressants and you can be disqualified from having just taken them.
  - sjg007 8y ago
    No you are wrong. That would be against the Americans with disabilities act.
    - pard68 8y ago
      ADA has limits. You can't be in the military if you are missing a limb. Can't be a police officer if you have mental issues. There are common sense limits to ADA.
    - zrobotics 8y ago
      So wait, I could have been an air force pilot after all, and their annoying eyesight and physical requirements are illegal? That is absolutely ridiculous, the ADA doesn't imply that anyone with any disability needs to be accommodated for any job, just that reasonable accommodation be made. For instance, someone in a wheelchair will be unable to do many jobs, regardless of accommodation,such as framing carpentry and roofing. As someone who has gotten ADA accommodations related to mental health, there are absolutely limits. Due to my hand tremors, no hospital in the nation would allow me to be a surgeon, regardless of qualifications. Ditto for police departments, due to said mental-health issues.
      - MaxBarraclough 8y ago
        Here in the UK at least, the military is one of the very few exceptions to the disabilities laws. I believe even the police are subject to the disabilities laws, the medical profession too. In which case they most likely can't even ask. (Not a lawyer, just a bumbling Internet commentator, you'd be insane to take me seriously, etc)
      - afpx 8y ago
        I think the vast majority of people would agree with you. Clearly, some jobs require certain physical attributes. However, which jobs would a person with a psychiatric disorder be disqualified for? Couldn’t one argue that all jobs that require a brain would be off-limits? Probably not, but where is the line drawn?
        madengr 8y ago
        Anything that requires a security clearance.
        ams6110 8y ago
        And that is as much because of the potential for the condition to be used for blackmail as it is any real limits it imposes on the work you would be doing. And for some jobs, e.g. you want to work undercover for the CIA as a field agent, your mental state is not what would be strictly considered normal.
  - actualdc1 8y ago
    Doctor here. Can confirm this to be completely incorrect.
    - riahi 8y ago
      I respectfully disagree. Disclosing these things makes your life a living hell. https://www.acepnow.com/article/emergency-physician-with-depression-chronicles-her-10-year-fight-to-keep-her-license/?fbclid=IwAR1dvJldVBEhy1vgMi1k0wMVaV4G0JQrJfQMrlE28QsmRK99fWCRrDZDdPg https://www.acepnow.com/article/emergency-physician-with-dep... (Reddit thread discussing that article) https://www.reddit.com/r/medicine/comments/aaappq/emergency_physician_chronicles_her_ten_year_fight/ https://www.reddit.com/r/medicine/comments/aaappq/emergency_...
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
    - skh 8y ago
      My wife is a psychiatrist and sees a psychiatrist off the record because she’s afraid of the stigma affecting her career. It’s just one data point but I find it telling that a psychiatrist is afraid that other psychiatrists will know she takes med to treat a psychiatric condition. Hers is anxiety related.
      - analog31 8y ago
        In my view it's pretty widespread that people are hesitant to seek certain kinds of care because of the potential effect of a "pre existing condition" on their employability.
        dorchadas 8y ago
        Exactly. I don't think it's because the medical board itself would stop them, but more because the stigma attached to it would lead to people questioning them and their ability to do their job, not to mention the issues with insurance. I'd say that likely has a lot more to do with doctors wanting to see others off-the-record... I know of some teachers who do the same thing with psychiatrists, because they don't want it getting out to the students' parents.
- SkyPuncher 8y ago
  > So you are saying a disability is disqualifying to be a doctor? No that is not correct. No, you are wrong. Mental health among doctors is a huge issue in the field right now. In some states having a recorded case of depression is enough for you to have a license review. Behind closed doors everyone will tell you to lie about your mental history. If you need help, you better make damn sure you're going to someone who will take cash and not keep any records of your appointments. Doctors are literally having their entire careers put at risk because they admit they're human.
- markroseman 8y ago
  Varies by jurisdiction, but there are a lot of places, including many areas in the USA, where this is very much an issue, affecting licensing and credentialing. Would it survive a court challenge? Probably not, but I don't know a lot of doctors who would take the risk of reputation, career prospects, lost income, etc. to find out.

infotogivenm 8y ago

Came here to say this. From the med students I know, I would have guessed 100%.

village-idiot 8y ago

Indeed, this is a very misleading title. Medical researchers might understand that caffeine is a stimulant, but as a layperson I assumed they meant aderall or similar.

criddell 8y ago
How were you mislead? What difference does it make if it's a prescription stimulant?
- insertnickname 8y ago
  Prescription stimulants like amphetamine and methylphenidate are more potent than caffeine. What if the headline had said "75 % of med students are on drugs" but actually it just means that 75 % of med students occasionally take acetaminophen or aspirin for headaches? Those are indeed drugs, but wouldn't you feel misled? People drinking coffee is not newsworthy, so one wouldn't expect an article about it. I haven't looked at the data the article is based on, so I don't know if something like this is what's going on, but I think this is the point village-idiot was trying to make.
  - hvindin 8y ago
    No shit speed and meth are stronger than coffee. I don't think that was the point being made. Or at least its probably safe to assume the commenter you are replying to didn't indend to imply that. Sorry to be do blunt but casually ignoring things like modafinil which seems to be the go to drug for staving off sleep if you want to be able to pass drug tests is a bit of a mistake. Subjectivly most users of modafinil find it "weaker" than coffee because there is no rush associated with it as there is with coffee, you just can't sleep when you take it. So if the point you're making is actually just virtue signalling with the "well some drugs are worse than others because I guess they are classified as controlled?" bullshit then please provide an actual reason why the comment was disagreeable.
    - natalyarostova 8y ago

abnry 8y ago

You dug into the sources? The author of the linked article wrote, "I discovered that 75% of med students (and new doctors) are now on psychiatric medications." That seems to exclude caffeine from coffee.

DevX101 8y ago
The article is based on a collection of anecdotes from responses to a Facebook question: “75% of med students and residents are taking either stimulants or antidepressants or both. True or false?” Ctrl-f for 'coffee' to see some sample responses.

Synaesthesia 8y ago

If you’ve ever had Ritalin, or amphetamine you’ll know it’s a different kettle of fish to coffee.

crankylinuxuser 8y ago
I drink large amounts of coffee. Previously, I bought a 4oz jar of anhydrous caffeine powder. I've also been on 10mg BID amphetamine. To compare the 2, the amphetamine feels more artificial bodily wise. However ingesting about 500mg caffeine has the similar bodily feel as 10mg amphetamine. Given the amphetamine did some tricks like time delayed whereas the caffeine did not, does make it harder to compare. The caffeine did stay just as long, and provided a much longer bodily high. These days, I just drink coffee and stay away from pills and powder. Safer.
- whalesalad 8y ago
  I don't really know how anyone could honestly compare caffeine and amphetamines. One is like a knife and the other is like a 50 cal machine gun, as far as stimulation goes. There is a reason amphetamines are a schedule II drug and caffeine is not.
  - roel_v 8y ago
    It's about dosage. 5 mg of amphetamines is really just a bit a boost. Of course if you start cutting lines and snort them to keep awake and dancing until noon the next day, it's a different story.
  - crankylinuxuser 8y ago
    > I don't really know how anyone could honestly compare caffeine and amphetamines. They are both stimulants. I've done both, like I said. So yes, for my body (n=1) I can indeed compare them. And it was sincere and honest. And the only reason why caffeine isn't schedule 2 is the same reason why alcohol and nicotine isn't either. That's purely a societal reason, and no basis in chemistry. If caffeine/coffee was discovered last year, it would be schedule drug. Look no further than kratom.

drb91 8y ago

Coffee is quite stimulating by itself, an addiction can probably ruin your life via sleep and anxiety. I’m fine with it being classified as a stimulant, although I wish they pulled caffeine out into its own category.