Honestly, I took it as an axiom so as to steel-man the article's argument; if there were no difference between prescribed and unprescribed use, any dismissal of

Honestly, I took it as an axiom so as to steel-man the article's argument; if there were no difference between prescribed and unprescribed use, any dismissal of concerns about overprescription would be trivial. But if I had to argue for it: I'd wager that unprescribed usage on college campuses is more likely to fall outside of medical guidelines (e.g. at late hours to pull all nighters, or in higher doses for recreational and euphoriant purposes). Whether or not one demonizes this as unethical, it should be uncontroversial to describe the concomitant increases in e.g. seizure risk, addiction, and other side effects as not-benign. It also advantages 1) lawbreakers who 2) can afford secondhand stimulants. Yes, this is also evidence towards "ok so don't legally require an rx to purchase these"—but such are the rules of the game students are playing, and the argument from personal freedom is strained when made in a competitive context.