Psycho-Babble Medication Thread 617202

Shown: posts 1 to 25 of 25. This is the beginning of the thread.

 

NYTIMES- Attention Surplus?Re-examining a Disorder

Posted by jrbecker on March 7, 2006, at 18:28:45

Attention Surplus? Re-examining a Disorder

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/07/health/07essa.html?ex=1141880400&en=838e4cfd9fb10434&ei=5070

 

Re: NYTIMES- Attention Surplus?Re-examining a Disorder

Posted by zeugma on March 7, 2006, at 19:53:13

In reply to NYTIMES- Attention Surplus?Re-examining a Disorder, posted by jrbecker on March 7, 2006, at 18:28:45

I did not think that this article in any way correctly represents ADHD as I have seen it in myself, or as I have seen it in others.

But no doubt, there is a disorder that this article accurately describes, Non-Attention-Surplus Disorder, and with luck it can be kept out of the DSM-V.

-z

 

Re: NYTIMES- Attention Surplus?Re-examining a Diso » jrbecker

Posted by Chairman_MAO on March 7, 2006, at 23:15:23

In reply to NYTIMES- Attention Surplus?Re-examining a Disorder, posted by jrbecker on March 7, 2006, at 18:28:45

The term attention-deficit disorder turns out to be a misnomer. Most people who have it actually have remarkably good attention spans as long as they are doing activities that they enjoy or find stimulating. As Martha B. Denckla of the Kennedy Krieger Institute in Baltimore has noted, we should probably be calling the condition something like "intention-inhibition disorder," because it is a condition in which one's best intentions — say, reading 50 pages in a dense textbook or writing a 10-page paper in a timely fashion — go awry."

That is utter nonsense. The activities which my attentional problems have prohibited me from engaging in fully are often things which I _DO_ find extraordinarily interesting! Apparently these people are not aware that certain people ENJOY academics. I was a philosophy major in college and found much of what I read highly stimulating. Instead, I found myself staring blankly at the page, wondering why I just lost my place after only five sentences despite scoring a 760 verbal on the SAT and being nominated for philosophy undergraduate of the year. This would happen over and over and over again. My poor focus, inability to schedule tasks properly, excessive starting of new projects, etc. were always there, despite whether I enjoyed what I was doing or not. The only activities which I could do well were those that involved "microfocusing", such as intensive computer use. However, even then I found it hard to put EFFORT into a task and complete it; I just flourished in that area because it lends itself to short bursts of attention on multiple tasks.

The hallmark of any disorder is its presence in manifold situations, especially those in which it wouldn't make sense for someone with the subject's beliefs and desires to have such a problem. For instance, when not on the right medication, I usually don't get felings of positive reinforcement from obviously positive situations, such as a pretty girl saying "I wish I had a tape recorder so I could record what you are saying because every word is so interesting." If I gave a class presentation and received actual applause, I'd feel anxiety, confusion, terror and a feeling of "what, that's directed at me? Why?" No matter how many compliments I'd receive or how many accomplishments I managed, I never felt any sense of positive reinforcement whatsoever. I could of course be cheered up sometimes, but I'd always end up with a sense of hollowness combined with this vague hint of dread and self-loathing. This is beyond what one might call shy or coy!

Overall, I found that article to be indicative only of the woefully incompetent norm in mental health care.


 

Re: NYTIMES- Attention Surplus?Re-examining a Diso

Posted by River1924 on March 8, 2006, at 2:46:30

In reply to Re: NYTIMES- Attention Surplus?Re-examining a Diso » jrbecker, posted by Chairman_MAO on March 7, 2006, at 23:15:23

Like a lot of newspaper articles or reports, I am not sure that article has anything to say at all. It seems have a prejudice against the concept of ADHD. (A local conservative radio announcer regularily rants against people who imagine ADHD exists (as do all the famous (and not so famous) scientologists.) It makes the point that educators should make an effort to work/redirect/pay attention to a child's natural learning inclinations. And, it suggests that this society makes demands on people that could be different. Yes. I agree. But I don't really see what that has to do with anything. What is the point of the article?

 

Re: NYTIMES- Attention Surplus?Re-examining a Diso

Posted by utopizen on March 8, 2006, at 11:08:06

In reply to Re: NYTIMES- Attention Surplus?Re-examining a Diso, posted by River1924 on March 8, 2006, at 2:46:30

Well, I thought it was pretty balanced.

In fact, um, it suggested there's a lot of good attributes to AD/HD.

More important, however, is that people with AD/HD tend to be smarter. If they weren't, they would be unlikely to get diagnosed... as there tends to be a high discrepancy between one's apptitude, and one's application of their apptitude, and that basically leads people to get their kids diagnosed.

 

RE diagnosis of ADHD in adults

Posted by ed_uk on March 8, 2006, at 16:20:15

In reply to NYTIMES- Attention Surplus?Re-examining a Disorder, posted by jrbecker on March 7, 2006, at 18:28:45

Do we expect too much of ourselves these days?

Ed

 

Re: NYTIMES- Attention Surplus?Re-examining a Diso » Chairman_MAO

Posted by mike99 on March 8, 2006, at 18:48:57

In reply to Re: NYTIMES- Attention Surplus?Re-examining a Diso » jrbecker, posted by Chairman_MAO on March 7, 2006, at 23:15:23

>> The activities which my attentional problems have prohibited me from engaging in fully are often things which I _DO_ find extraordinarily interesting!

Ditto


>> I was a philosophy major in college and found much of what I read highly stimulating. Instead, I found myself staring blankly at the page, wondering why I just lost my place after only five sentences

Wow, Chaiman_MAO---when I first read your post I thought for a few moments I may have had written it myself in an ambien delerium and not realized it. Seriously, it took a minute to make sure I hadn't posted this myself!

I too majored in philosophy. It's the one thing I did fairly well in in college simply because I love it. However, it was still a significant struggle and I'm sure I would not be able to perform at the graduate level in philosophy with my ADHD. Now I just want to study it for pleasure.

I've been wanting to read a book called "Hume: A very short Introduction" for a while. If I'm ever able to find an effective med that I can tolerate it will be the first thing I buy. I could not really understand or enjoy it off meds as I currently am.


>>, when not on the right medication, I usually don't get felings of positive reinforcement from obviously positive situations, such as a pretty girl saying "I wish I had a tape recorder so I could record what you are saying because every word is so interesting."

OK... I have to differ here. Reception from pretty girls ALWAYS gives me positive reinforcement ;)

I remember the last time I took Dexedrine I struck up a conversation with a really pretty girl on the subway on route to a Dave Matthews Band concert. I'm not overly shy but am definitely introverted, as well as a bit double-tongued around pretty women. Anyhow, I was able to just start talking with her out of nowhere. I actually initiated the conversation and was halfway witty and confident. Being able to actually pay attention to her in conversation made a HUGE difference in my ability to interact with the opposite sex.

Anyhow, I think I'm starting to digress. Cheers,

Mike

 

Do we expect too much of ourselves these days?

Posted by mike99 on March 8, 2006, at 19:19:17

In reply to RE diagnosis of ADHD in adults, posted by ed_uk on March 8, 2006, at 16:20:15

> Do we expect too much of ourselves these days?
>
> Ed

Yes.

I found it intersting the author stated, "If it is indeed a context-driven disorder, let's change the contexts and not just support and accomodate the needs of children with attention surplus disorder" interesting.

Actually, aren't many psych disorders such as depression and anxiety also at least partially context-driven? IMHO our genes and minds did not evolve to thrive in our modern-day society.

Also, IMHO the term "attention surplus disorder" is dubious and does not contribute anything new or insightful to the discussion of ADHD.

 

Re: RE diagnosis of ADHD in adults » ed_uk

Posted by Jakeman on March 8, 2006, at 21:28:21

In reply to RE diagnosis of ADHD in adults, posted by ed_uk on March 8, 2006, at 16:20:15

> Do we expect too much of ourselves these days?
>
> Ed

Hi Ed,

Yes, I think we do. In the West, there is little appreciation for just being yourself. Also as we've become more modernized earlier support structures such as tribes and families have diminished or have disappeared.

I'm a history buff and I've been reading the recent biographies of Abraham Lincoln. Apparently he had major depression, and was possibly bi-polar. But, from what I've read, the social attitude was different then. Someone who was melancholy was often seen as evidence of a deep thinker, someone could understand the suffering of people. Someone who was realistic.

But today everyone has to have a smile on their face. It's not natural.

warm regards, ~Jake

 

Re: RE diagnosis of ADHD in adults » Jakeman

Posted by ed_uk on March 9, 2006, at 13:23:36

In reply to Re: RE diagnosis of ADHD in adults » ed_uk, posted by Jakeman on March 8, 2006, at 21:28:21

Hi Jake

>But today everyone has to have a smile on their face.

And everyone expects to be able to concentrate in class ;-)

Ed

 

Re: RE diagnosis of ADHD in adults » ed_uk

Posted by Jakeman on March 9, 2006, at 19:30:36

In reply to Re: RE diagnosis of ADHD in adults » Jakeman, posted by ed_uk on March 9, 2006, at 13:23:36

> And everyone expects to be able to concentrate in class ;-)
>

Yes. Albert Einstein had problems with that. Perhaps ADHD ;-)

 

Re: Do we expect too much of ourselves these days? » mike99

Posted by Chairman_MAO on March 9, 2006, at 21:11:12

In reply to Do we expect too much of ourselves these days?, posted by mike99 on March 8, 2006, at 19:19:17

Attributing teleological intentionality to evolution is one of my major qualms with today's "pop science"--as well as consciousness-negating closet-epiphenominalist philosophers such as Daniel Dennett. I must point out that evolution itself is a theory (the best one we have so far, but one nonetheless), and as such it seems foolish to imbue it with human characteristics such as purposeful action. At best it is a precision-ground lens through which we can get closer to the truth.

However, as Hume (giving a shout out to Him because you brought him up, heh) said, "The ultimate springs and principles are shut out from our observation" (or something like that). We cannot know what evolution planned because evolution itself is a description of reality, not the reality of the description.

That said, I agree with you that psychiatic "disorders" (the nom-du-jour of those honest enough to admit that these do not pass muster as medical diseases) obviously are contextually based. However, the person pointing this out in the article obviously lacks the insight that ANY description of human behavior is contextually based, because we need a context to operate in. There would be no "ADHD" if there were nothing to pay attention to. Saying that those with attentional problems would be fine if we lived "naturally" is nothing more than a hypothetical bromide. The obvious reality is that there are people with this deficiency, which is not so much of attention per se than of the attentional and executive faculties _relative to the individual's other cognitive faculties_.

This is all a fancy way of saying that if people have problems concentrating and there are drugs which help, they should have the right to take them. Everyone knows psychostimulants help; people have been using them to concentrate well before psychiatrists "discovered" ADHD ("hyperkinesis") and stimulant treatment thereof (1937 in children, much later in adults).

See: "Who Put the Benzedrine in Mrs. Murphy's Ovaltine" by Harry "The Hipster" Gibson, circa 1944. He obviously was "hip" to it.


 

Re: NYTIMES- Attention Surplus?Re-examining a Diso » mike99

Posted by Chairman_MAO on March 9, 2006, at 21:32:16

In reply to Re: NYTIMES- Attention Surplus?Re-examining a Diso » Chairman_MAO, posted by mike99 on March 8, 2006, at 18:48:57

I had a very similar experience on Dexedrine while taking an Amtrak train from Syracuse--where I was going to school--to New York City, where I was going to party (in those days that meant enough drugs for a shattering yet soothing ontological confrontation with myself for no less than 36 hours) for New Year's Eve. I was so utterly ebullient, so "in my element", so FREE for a change it felt as if I had gained some kind of enlightenment. Now, I knew that I hadn't of course, but it was great to get but a glimpse into something more sober than my default state. Yeah, I'm sure I was high, but I was much closer to who I actually am at heart than I was drug-free.

The depression and other mental issues have gotten so much more recalcitant since then that I could take 90mg+ of d-amphetamine and not experience anything remotely resembling that. I fell of the euthymia wagon when I dropped the Nardil and I'm trying to get back on.

Can you not tolerate d-amphetamine? How about methamphetamine? That is usually MORE tolerable because lower doses can be used. If not, have you ever tried MAOIs? That sounds out in left field, I know, but they are MUCH better than nothing for ADHD. Tranylcypromine 0.7mg/kg in divided doses, then increasing to 1.5mg/kg if no response is where I'd start first.

 

Re: NYTIMES- Attention Surplus?Re-examining a Diso

Posted by alohashirt on March 10, 2006, at 0:29:27

In reply to Re: NYTIMES- Attention Surplus?Re-examining a Diso » mike99, posted by Chairman_MAO on March 9, 2006, at 21:32:16

I thought the article was fair. Ned Hallowell is a psychiatrist with ADHD who has specialized in treatment of ADHD. In his books he questions whether ADHD is a purely negative thiung or rather a different brain makeup that make some things hard and other things easy. I know taht I find it easy to concentrate when there is tremendous levels of chaos and excitement or if I am under tremendous pressure. Its when thinsg ar emore settled that I struggle. Interuppt driven work suits me much better than longer term project work.

Hallowell is very pro-,med. he is also pro other treaments in addition. For me just meds is not enough. Exercise, having an ADHD coach are also crucial.

Re: desoxyn - assuming you don't buy it from bikers, how do you find a pdoc who would prescrivbe it?

 

Re: NYTIMES- Attention Surplus?Re-examining a Diso » Chairman_MAO

Posted by mike99 on March 10, 2006, at 11:59:41

In reply to Re: NYTIMES- Attention Surplus?Re-examining a Diso » mike99, posted by Chairman_MAO on March 9, 2006, at 21:32:16

Yeah, I'm sure I was high, but I was much closer to who I actually am at heart than I was drug-free.

I know what you mean.

> Can you not tolerate d-amphetamine?

Unfortunately not.

>How about methamphetamine?

I'm reluctant to try it because despite it's increased tolerability over amphetamine, meth is partially converted to d and l-amp in the body---and I am EXTREMELY sensitive to them (15 mg of Dex over 3 days sent me to the emergency room).

>> If not, have you ever tried MAOIs? That sounds out in left field, I know, but they are MUCH better than nothing for ADHD.

I never have, and it actually doesn't sound that crazy. Actually, I get the impression they're much more reliable than most other AD's.

Do you know how they compare to stimulants in terms of peripheral activation? I'm very sensitive in that regard and so am considering a trial of Provigil first.

 

Re: NYTIMES- Attention Surplus?Re-examining a Diso » mike99

Posted by Chairman_MAO on March 10, 2006, at 12:53:28

In reply to Re: NYTIMES- Attention Surplus?Re-examining a Diso » Chairman_MAO, posted by mike99 on March 10, 2006, at 11:59:41

You would probably fare better on tranylcypromine (or selegiline) than Provigil. IMHO its use for concentration problems is ill-founded.

If you want to try an MAOI for attention/concentration problems, I'd suggest first going with the selegiline patch at the lowest dose. Selegiline has nootropic effects not related to MAO inhibition. The side effect profile at low doses is also fantastic. If the patch doesn't work out, you can always try tranylcypromine.

Selegiline has shown benefit in studies in Alzheimer's, ADHD (children and adults), and narcolepsy. Anyone who had partial success with bupropion probably would like the patch better; selegiline is WAY more dopaminergic than bupropion.

BTW, Desoxyn is d-methamphetamine (MAP), not the racemate. The equivalent of 15mg d-amphetamine (AMP) is probably around 5mg MAP. Only a fraction is metabolized into AMP, which is 1/5th the potency of l-amphetamine with regard to peripheral stimulation. Thus, I think you are worrying a bit too much. :)

 

Re: NYTIMES- Attention Surplus?Re-examining a Diso » alohashirt

Posted by Chairman_MAO on March 10, 2006, at 13:03:13

In reply to Re: NYTIMES- Attention Surplus?Re-examining a Diso, posted by alohashirt on March 10, 2006, at 0:29:27

Any psychiatric diagnosis has a wholly negative connotation. The notion of "mental illness" itself is a "behavioral pathology", which in turn cannot be anything but a value judgement.

Is it that you find it easier to concentrate while under pressure, or that while under pressure you are more motivated to overlook what you'd ordinarily perceive as a shortcoming?

Certainly I agree with you that one needs more than medication.

 

Re: NYTIMES- Attention Surplus? working in cube

Posted by Jakeman on March 10, 2006, at 20:05:55

In reply to NYTIMES- Attention Surplus?Re-examining a Disorder, posted by jrbecker on March 7, 2006, at 18:28:45

Sorry to veer off topic a bit, but I work in a cubicle and can't concentrate with the distractions around me. Phones ringing, people talking etc. When I have to actually think creatively, or write a letter or something I have to walk outside to collect my thoughts. It's like my brain's radar is turned on too high and I pick up everything. I've thought of buying noise deadening headphones. Has anyone tried this? What else? I'm amazed at the people around me who seem to thrive in this atmosphere. It totally drains me.

warm regards ~Jake

 

Re: NYTIMES- Attention Surplus?Re-examining a Diso » Chairman_MAO

Posted by mike99 on March 11, 2006, at 9:53:00

In reply to Re: NYTIMES- Attention Surplus?Re-examining a Diso » mike99, posted by Chairman_MAO on March 10, 2006, at 12:53:28


>
> If you want to try an MAOI for attention/concentration problems, I'd suggest first going with the selegiline patch at the lowest dose. Selegiline has nootropic effects not related to MAO inhibition. The side effect profile at low doses is also fantastic. If the patch doesn't work out, you can always try tranylcypromine.

Thanks for the suggestion.


> BTW, Desoxyn is d-methamphetamine (MAP), not the racemate. The equivalent of 15mg d-amphetamine (AMP) is probably around 5mg MAP. Only a fraction is metabolized into AMP, which is 1/5th the potency of l-amphetamine with regard to peripheral stimulation. Thus, I think you are worrying a bit too much. :)

I hope so. I'm also glad to hear Desoxyn is d-meth and not the racemate. Would I be correct in inferring that 5 mg Desoxyn would have less peripheral activation than 15 mg d-AMP?

Also, in terms of peripheral stimulation might you have an idea of how say 5 mg Desoxyn compares to 30 mg pseudoephedrine?

Cheers,

Mike

>
>

 

Re: NYTIMES- Attention Surplus?Re-examining a Diso » Chairman_MAO

Posted by mike99 on March 11, 2006, at 19:53:20

In reply to Re: NYTIMES- Attention Surplus?Re-examining a Diso » mike99, posted by Chairman_MAO on March 10, 2006, at 12:53:28

> You would probably fare better on tranylcypromine (or selegiline) than Provigil. IMHO its use for concentration problems is ill-founded.
>
> If you want to try an MAOI for attention/concentration problems, I'd suggest first going with the selegiline patch at the lowest dose.

Why not Parnate first? An MAOI is something I never thought I'd seriously consider, but given the buzz they've been getting here on PB I'm reconsidering. If an MAOI would hit my ADHD and dysthymia AND I could tolerate it from a cardiovascular standpoint (biggest if) might give it a shot.

If you don't mind, Chairman_MAO, may I ask you a few further questions regarding them? (I take no offense if you're too busy to respond or don't know).

Do you really think Parnate would be a better choice for ADHD than Modafinil (you're probably aware it's recently received an FDA indication for ADHD)?

Might you know how MAOI's (selegiline not included) compare to Ritalin and Dex in terms of peripheral/cardiovascular stimulation? Caffeine, Provigil?

Do MAOI's have more or less of a propensity to poop out than the other AD's?

Do you know if Nardil or Parnate would have more or less peripheral/cardiovascular stimulation than the selegiline patch? (I ask this because seligline is converted to Meth and AMP, though I believe this conversion is extremely minimal)?

Cheers,

Mike

 

Re: NYTIMES- Attention Surplus?Re-examining a Diso » mike99

Posted by ed_uk on March 12, 2006, at 9:53:19

In reply to Re: NYTIMES- Attention Surplus?Re-examining a Diso » Chairman_MAO, posted by mike99 on March 11, 2006, at 19:53:20

Hi Mike

Phenelzine (Nardil) in particular tends to reduce BP and heart rate - provided that you don't eat the wrong foods of course!

Ed

 

Thanks Ed! (nm) » ed_uk

Posted by mike99 on March 12, 2006, at 13:15:31

In reply to Re: NYTIMES- Attention Surplus?Re-examining a Diso » mike99, posted by ed_uk on March 12, 2006, at 9:53:19

 

Re: NYTIMES- Attention Surplus?Re-examining a Diso

Posted by alohashirt on March 12, 2006, at 22:31:17

In reply to Re: NYTIMES- Attention Surplus?Re-examining a Diso » alohashirt, posted by Chairman_MAO on March 10, 2006, at 13:03:13

The reality is that a lot of medicine today (ADHD, testosterone deficiency, anxiety) is more about quality of life than illness. The model is an illness model so its reasonable we perceive everything as illness even when the metaphor doesn't fit. It takes a brave doctor to see past this.

> Any psychiatric diagnosis has a wholly negative connotation. The notion of "mental illness" itself is a "behavioral pathology", which in turn cannot be anything but a value judgement.

I agree - though thinking of ADHD as a illness is a shade better than my prior view of it as a moral weakness / sloth.

> Is it that you find it easier to concentrate while under pressure, or that while under pressure you are more motivated to overlook what you'd ordinarily perceive as a shortcoming?

the former. One part of my ADHD is that I make suboptimal choices abt how to direct my energy. Pamic and terror can really help motivate me to focus on doing a better job of this.

> Certainly I agree with you that one needs more than medication.

 

Re: NYTIMES- Attention Surplus?Re-examining a Diso » Chairman_MAO

Posted by alohashirt on March 12, 2006, at 22:33:53

In reply to Re: NYTIMES- Attention Surplus?Re-examining a Diso » mike99, posted by Chairman_MAO on March 10, 2006, at 12:53:28

Chairman_MAO - you are one a of a few people who have suggested that Desoxyn is an optimal stimulant. How can one get it prescribed?

> You would probably fare better on tranylcypromine (or selegiline) than Provigil. IMHO its use for concentration problems is ill-founded.
>
> If you want to try an MAOI for attention/concentration problems, I'd suggest first going with the selegiline patch at the lowest dose. Selegiline has nootropic effects not related to MAO inhibition. The side effect profile at low doses is also fantastic. If the patch doesn't work out, you can always try tranylcypromine.
>
> Selegiline has shown benefit in studies in Alzheimer's, ADHD (children and adults), and narcolepsy. Anyone who had partial success with bupropion probably would like the patch better; selegiline is WAY more dopaminergic than bupropion.
>
> BTW, Desoxyn is d-methamphetamine (MAP), not the racemate. The equivalent of 15mg d-amphetamine (AMP) is probably around 5mg MAP. Only a fraction is metabolized into AMP, which is 1/5th the potency of l-amphetamine with regard to peripheral stimulation. Thus, I think you are worrying a bit too much. :)
>
>

 

Parnate vs. Provigil » mike99

Posted by tessellated on March 15, 2006, at 1:17:52

In reply to Re: NYTIMES- Attention Surplus?Re-examining a Diso » Chairman_MAO, posted by mike99 on March 11, 2006, at 19:53:20

Mike,

i've used both parnate and provigil on and off quite effectively for over four years. recently i've even been augmenting parnate with provigil. (i don't recommend this at all-it gave me some form of heart burn).

provigil is great because i find it relatively clean and even mild. its easy to pick and choose other forms of augmentation, and i wouldn't even say i feel in any way "drugged/altered" by it

parnate in my mind is a radical philosophy. it alters the very fabric of my personality-positively. parnate is a total lifestyle change. diet (is not a big deal) but the radical way its alters much of your sympathetic nervous system exponentially complicates the use of any and all concurrent medications.

personally, i've yet to get much of anything aside from increased libido from selegeline.

parnate is an adventure its alters the matrix of my reality and adds excitement to life. provigil is does none of that, but is great for fatigue and all nighters. provigils beauty is that is not radical.

as parnates chemical structure is similar to amphetamine it would likely have similar benefits for ADD/ADHD. it really just depends on how radical a departure you want to make. i think parnate is vastly preferrable to amphetamine and far more profound.

profound isn't always preferrable though....

i belive parnate would help with both ADHD and dysthymia, though it does also radically compromise the stability of sympathetic nervous system. personally i experience mild orthostatic hypotension, not hypertension. however parnate is is contraidicted as follows:
In patients with cerebrovascular defects or cardiovascular disorders
PARNATE should not be administered to any patient with a confirmed or suspected cerebrovascular defect or to any patient with cardiovascular disease or hypertension.

however, they also tell you not to eat banana peels, so i take everything with a salt lick when it comes to MAOI's anymore.

l8

> > You would probably fare better on tranylcypromine (or selegiline) than Provigil. IMHO its use for concentration problems is ill-founded.
> >
> > If you want to try an MAOI for attention/concentration problems, I'd suggest first going with the selegiline patch at the lowest dose.
>
> Why not Parnate first? An MAOI is something I never thought I'd seriously consider, but given the buzz they've been getting here on PB I'm reconsidering. If an MAOI would hit my ADHD and dysthymia AND I could tolerate it from a cardiovascular standpoint (biggest if) might give it a shot.
>
> If you don't mind, Chairman_MAO, may I ask you a few further questions regarding them? (I take no offense if you're too busy to respond or don't know).
>
> Do you really think Parnate would be a better choice for ADHD than Modafinil (you're probably aware it's recently received an FDA indication for ADHD)?
>
> Might you know how MAOI's (selegiline not included) compare to Ritalin and Dex in terms of peripheral/cardiovascular stimulation? Caffeine, Provigil?
>
> Do MAOI's have more or less of a propensity to poop out than the other AD's?
>
> Do you know if Nardil or Parnate would have more or less peripheral/cardiovascular stimulation than the selegiline patch? (I ask this because seligline is converted to Meth and AMP, though I believe this conversion is extremely minimal)?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Mike
>
>
>
>


This is the end of the thread.


Show another thread

URL of post in thread:


Psycho-Babble Medication | Extras | FAQ


[dr. bob] Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD, bob@dr-bob.org

Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.