Your response is vague apologism for irresponsible journalism justified on a minor technicality. The articles is so stupidly charitable to it's own worldview(i

Your response is vague apologism for irresponsible journalism justified on a minor technicality. The articles is so stupidly charitable to it's own worldview(in the sense of lying) and omitting so much from the other side that it is ridiculous. You are wrong to think that these people deserve "serious consideration", when the article is written itself to produce knee-jerk reactions "The drugging of the american boy....", as if we had IV Heroin plugged to these kids. Article allows for the opposition, most people who have random opinions about ADHD for no apparent reason other than to have an opinion. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23382575 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23382575 (Is ADHD a Risk Factor for High School Dropout? A Controlled Study.) tells us that " Conclusion: Participants with ADHD were significantly more likely to repeat a grade" Do you know the cost of high school drop outs or grade repeats to society? What about to the kid, who suffers massive self-esteem loss and under-values himself? Why is the author not more responsible? The modern era brings us new journalism-contrarian-chic, stylstic articles that irresponsibly lend fuel to very harmful world-views(such asADHD is not serious) What drugs, exactly, and to which boy? Is the cost of not-treating much greater than the cost of treating? The article is merely an appeal to pop-trash trendy world-views, and does not deserve much of a response at all