> there are no longterm effects of amphetamine use at therapeutic dosages, that's fake news. Sure, I would agree they are not common, but that doesn't mean the

> there are no longterm effects of amphetamine use at therapeutic dosages, that's fake news. Sure, I would agree they are not common, but that doesn't mean they do not exist. Not to mention we only know what we know, and we do not know what we do not know. Other than potential cardiac and vascular issues, albeit rare, researchers are still debating whether the stimulant medications cause an increase in Parkinson's and Parkinson's-like disorders. > there is 100% a utility in it for some. Sure, I won't disagree. I still take mine, but it's more of a "it's better than nothing" but I question if the efficacy is as strong as many anecdotes report. Especially after longterm usage. I'll see if I can find the study, but it was some sort of meta-analysis and tracked various children-aged students across a 7 years or so long timespan. Based on the researchers' observations, the medications greatly improved the symptoms of the youth for the first year or so, but around the 7 year mark, the students were back to baseline levels symptoms. I'm not sharing this to be the 'come all, end all' of the debate of medication intervention. I just remember being told and having read on numerous occasions that, "you gain a tolerance to the feeling of the medication, but not to the therapeutic effects" but I do not believe it. Tolerance is tolerance at least in my experience.