EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
- Corporate Win: Supreme Court Says Monsanto Has 'Control Over Product of Life'
- How the US Turned Three Pacifists into Violent Terrorists
- Cornel West: Obama 'Is a War Criminal'
- In 'March Toward Disaster,' World Hits 400 PPM Milestone
- Revealed: How US State Department 'Twists Arms' on Monsanto's Behalf
Popular content
Today's Top News
ADHD: It’s The Food, Stupid
Over five million children ages four to 17 have been diagnosed with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in the United States and close to 3 million of those children take medication for their symptoms, according to the Centers for Disease Control. But a new study reported in The Lancet last month found that with a restricted diet alone, many children experienced a significant reduction in symptoms. The study’s lead author, Dr. Lidy Pelsser of the ADHD Research Centre in the Netherlands, said in an interview with NPR, “The teachers thought it was so strange that the diet would change the behavior of the child as thoroughly as they saw it. It was a miracle, the teachers said.”
Dr. Pessler’s study is the first to conclusively say that diet is implicated in ADHD. In the NPR interview, Dr. Pessler did not mince words, “Food is the main cause of ADHD,” she said adding, “After the diet, they were just normal children with normal behavior. They were no longer more easily distracted, they were no more forgetful, there were no more temper-tantrums.” The study found that in 64 percent of children with ADHD, the symptoms were caused by food. “It’s a hypersensitivity reaction to food,” Pessler said. (Flickr image: by Scorpions and Centaurs)
Dr. Pessler’s study is the first to conclusively say that diet is implicated in ADHD. In the NPR interview, Dr. Pessler did not mince words, “Food is the main cause of ADHD,” she said adding, “After the diet, they were just normal children with normal behavior. They were no longer more easily distracted, they were no more forgetful, there were no more temper-tantrums.” The study found that in 64 percent of children with ADHD, the symptoms were caused by food. “It’s a hypersensitivity reaction to food,” Pessler said.
This is good news for parents and children who would like to avoid many of the adverse side effects associated with common stimulant drugs like Ritalin used to treat ADHD—and bad news for the pharmaceutical industry. The National Institute of Mental Health reports that common side effects from the drugs are sleeplessness (for which a doctor might also prescribe sleeping pills) headaches and stomachaches, decreased appetite, and a long list of much more frightening (yet rarer) side effects, including feeling helpless, hopeless, or worthless, and new or worsening depression. But Pessler’s study indicates that up to two-thirds or two of the three million children currently medicated for ADHD may not need medication at all. “With all children, we should start with diet research,” Pessler said.
There are also questions about the long-term effects of stimulant drugs and growth in children. After three years on Ritalin, children were about an inch shorter and 4.4 pounds lighter than their peers, according to a major study published in the Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry in 2007. A 2010 study in the Journal of Pediatrics disputed these findings, but all the study’s authors had relationships with drug companies, some of which make stimulants. According to Reuters, “The lead author, Harvard University’s Dr. Joseph Biederman, was once called out by Iowa Senator Charles E. Grassley for the consulting fees he has received from such drug makers.”
This is just one example of how the powerful billion-dollar drug industry designs and interprets studies to suit their interests. Since the 1970s, researchers not tied to drug companies have been drawing connections between foods, food additives, and the symptoms associated with ADHD but many have been dismissed or overlooked by conventional medicine. One of the earliest researchers in this field was Dr. Benjamin Feingold who created a specific diet to address behavioral and developmental problems in children. The Feingold diet, as it is now called, recommends removing all food additives, dyes, and preservatives commonly found in the majority of industrial foods.
There are a multitude of credible scientific studies to indicate that diet plays a large role in the development of ADHD. One study found that the depletion of zinc and copper in children was more prevalent in children with ADHD. Another study found that one particular dye acts as a “central excitatory agent able to induce hyperkinetic behavior.” And yet another study suggests that the combination of various common food additives appears to have a neurotoxic effect—pointing to the important fact that while low levels of individual food additives may be regarded as safe for human consumption, we must also consider the combined effects of the vast array of food additives that are now prevalent in our food supply.
In Pessler’s study the children were placed on a restricted diet consisting of water, rice, turkey, lamb, lettuce, carrots, pears and other hypoallergenic foods—in other words, real, whole foods. This means that by default the diet contained very few, if any, food additives.
As I see it, there are two factors at work in this study: One being the allergic reaction to the actual foods themselves and the second being a possible reaction to food additives, or combinations of food additives, found in industrial foods. Both certainly could be at play in the results of this study, although the discussion of Dr. Pessler’s study thus far hasn’t addressed the latter issue.
One theme in the discussion of the story has been skepticism from mainstream media—the recent Los Angeles Times article (the only major daily newspaper to cover the study) was very skeptical, if not dismissive. The author writes, “Previous studies have found similar effects, but, like this one, they all had fundamental problems that made it easy for doctors to dismiss them.” NPR interviewer, Guy Raz asked a question invoking this tone as well, “Now, you’re not saying that some children with ADHD should not be given medication, right?” Pessler does say that there are some children and adults who might benefit from pharmaceuticals but her research indicates that far too many are being medicated unnecessarily—and this is the crux of the story.
The Los Angeles Times article ends on this note: “‘To be sure, the prospect of treating ADHD with diet instead of drugs would appeal to many parents,’ Dr. Jaswinder Ghuman, a child psychiatrist who treats ADHD says. ‘But parents who want to give it a try should be sure to consult their child’s physician first, she warned: ‘It’s not that simple to do appropriately.’”
Call me old-fashioned, but changing your child’s diet seems a lot “simpler” than altering his or her brain chemistry with a daily dose of pharmaceuticals. It does takes patience, trial and error, and commitment to complete an elimination diet—taking a pill to target symptoms certainly requires less effort on the part of the doctors, family and child. While no one is denying that ADHD is a complicated web of symptoms with potentially many contributing factors, why not start by examining the most basic and fundamental cornerstone of our health—the foods (and non-foods) we put into our bodies.
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...


64 Comments so far
Show AllADHC is indeed overdiagnosed. Spirited children who don't want to sit, be nice, mind their elders, have their homework done on time, who exasperate their adult minders are given chemotherapy for their "condition." This is a bad idea. I'm taking a bunch of medications but I'm already well grown and my brain has alredy been damaged by the many chemicals that have passed through it. But to a growing brain any medication not deemed absolutely necessary with opinions and second opinions and test results to ensure that it's needed is a kind of misguided "it's for their own good" form of child abuse, and the person who may grow up out of this will have been chemically altered.
So, it's only a new poison and not a new disease?
ocean et al
here are two books:
seeds of destruction http://www.globalresearch.ca/books/SoD.html
seeds of deception http://www.seedsofdeception.com/Public/Home/index.cfm
I used to teach third grade in Seattle. I taught a special class for children who scored in the top 5 percentile on standardized tests. I didn't have a high number of ADHD diagnosed children, but I did have a few. One boy in particular comes to mind. I have always resisted the idea of using medication to modify the behavior of children. I think it is incumbent upon we, as adults, and child care specialists, to modify the learning environment to meet the needs of the children we serve.
My teaching style involved a large number of field trips. I took the child I have in mind along with my class on an 8 day field trip to Death Valley. I changed his diet to the same healthful diet we all ate on the camping trip. We didn't have soft drinks or colored candy or other junk food available to our camps in the desert. The boy was a different kid after a few days. It's just one example, but I think it is consistent with the arguments expressed in this article.
I wonder if I could possibly attend that class of yours... ; )
I wouldn't mind an eight-day getaway to see again the many beauties of Death Valley.
Not many schoolchildren are lucky enough to have such a teacher, or the funding for such great learning experiences....
I can't believe this article. “Food is the main cause of ADHD"???? per a "doctor". That's HUGE red flag to me, and quite frankly, it's insulting to the intellect. What's next? The popular 1950's theory by Dr. Bruno Bettelheim that autism is caused by refrigerator mothers? CommonDreams, does anyone on your staff have a degree in biology? You seriously need some editors who understand science.
You see, unlike the author of this article, I LIVE with someone with AD/HD. I'm tired of people in the alternative health world, many of whom, quite frankly, do not understand AD/HD, saying that using medication to AD/HD is a bad idea. And for the record, I am not 100% anti-alternative medicine -- I do yoga and take vitamins.
My husband has AD/HD, as does his youngest sister. Two of his sisters do not have AD/HD, and they all ate the same food growing up. AD/HD is a neurological disorder that tends to run in families (with a 50% heritability rate). It's not something you get from eating too many Froot Loops!
And as for the "horrible" side effects of ritalin, my husband takes concerta, which contains the same ingredients as ritalin but has a slower delivery system. He swears by it, and it doesn't have any side effects. No doctor who knows how to prescribe meds would even prescribe ritalin anymore because patients have to take it twice a day and patients experience the "coming down" from ritalin and deal with it wearing off. My husband also takes lamictal, which is a mood stabilizer. Again, no side effects! When he doesn't take his meds, he can't concentrate and feels miserable. He is a healthy eater, takes vitamins, and exercises every day.
Not all people with AD/HD do well with ritalin. AD/HD symptoms vary greatly, as it's a spectrum disorder. The problem is that many physicians do not understand how to properly prescribe medication. My husband once was on strattera, and it did him more harm than good, so I've seen instances of medication not working.
Think about the scenario of some person AD/HD who can't focus and who needs meds but doesn't take them driving a car and accidentally running over a pedestrian or getting into a fatal car crash because they had trouble paying attention to their driving. Great health outcomes, eh?
There are, of course, people who do truly have ADHC such as the writer's husband. The article was about schoolchildren who, in most places, don't drive cars and get into fatal car crashes. There are probably are children who do have diagnosable ADHC but before medicating growing brains, this ought to be assessed very carefully so that chemicals are not introduced without absolute necessity. For grownup brains, if chemicals legal or otherwise help and have no negative side effects and don't cause rather than prevent "acting out," medicate away.
I think what's happening is that a lot of children are diagnosed with ADHD, which they actually don't have, and the symptoms that those diagnoses are based on might in fact be caused by shitty food. Or even overconsumption of media in early childhood, because there are studies that say that too. And with all due respect and sympathy to your situation and to people whose children really need the medicine, the overmedication of children (mainly talking about psychiatric drugs) probably causes a lot more medical harm in general than the problems it solves. I mean, we're living in times of "oppositional defiant disorder", whose symptoms are supposed to be these:
Actively does not follow adults' requests
Angry and resentful of others
Argues with adults
Blames others for own mistakes
Has few or no friends or has lost friends
Is in constant trouble in school
Loses temper
Spiteful or seeks revenge
Touchy or easily annoyed
It's small wonder that people become a bit more hostile towards related stuff, especially when a lot of companies (and doctors) leech off this bullshit. There are so many children on psychiatric drugs already, of course people are suspicious of this kind of stuff. This doesn't really mean that the illnesses don't exist.
I would like to correct you on one fact. The heritability rate for ADHD is actually estimated to be between .76 and .90. This suggest that there is more of a genetic component to this disorder than others such as schizophrenia which has a .5 heritability rate.
I disagree. The findings of this scientific study are not insulting to the intellect, at all. I'm more insulted by manufacturers of cereals, such as Cocopuffs and Lucky Charms, calling their products healthy. I'm more insulted by physicians who don't take the time to understand their patients, and take the easy way out treating symptoms by prescribing medications (from companies providing kick backs), rather than curing "disorders".
As for your husband and his family growing up, you said yourself that ADHD is a genetic disorder. That doesn't mean diet cannot be an effective treatment. For all we know, they could all have eaten poorly, but only your husband and his one sister had the genetic predisposition to ADHD.
I do agree that the statement, "Food is the main cause of ADHD," is probably inaccurate. But, based on your response, it appears you're completely dismissing the findings of this study due to your personal experience with ADHD. You're one person with one example.
Although I've never been diagnosed with ADHD (who knows, I might be if I went into the MD's office complaining of certain real, associated symptoms), my personal experience has proven to me that diet has an immense effect on one's physical and psychological well being.
RGUITIERREZ: Excellent response. I've noticed that a few people on this site use their personal anecdotal experiences as a cause to discredit useful, viable studies.
Changes in diet have given rise to all sorts of healed conditions, but the "industrial food" sector, along with its rich cousin, "big pharma" would prefer that people not consider these routes to well-being.
Today's "food" is to nutrition what Obama is to progressives. Unfortunately, words so often get in the way of the truth.
That's modern medicine. Quick fix chemotherapy for any and all conditions. In the world of "managed care" you usually get the minimum number of minutes possible actually talking with your doctor. They set you up for a few tests (if they feel it's needed to avoid medical malpractice suits) and give you a prescription and on to the next patient
Excelllent comment! Having looked at the abstract of the study, I agree.
Although this is anecdotal, I come from a family with a LONG history of Attention Deficit with and without hyperactivity. It has affected me, two of my brothers, one of my cousins two of my aunts, and one of my children. I get very tired of the "Boys being Boys" and the "overdiagnosis" arguments (although there may be overdiagnosis, I will accept that).
As a child, we experimented in our house with the Feingold diet, which was an elimination diet, although it concentrated on removal of artificial colors, flavors and preservatives, plus many salicylate containing foods. As a by-product, it also eliminated many of the common high igg allergen foods, as well as excessive sugar and over-processed carbs. And for one brother it WORKED!, but it is very unmanageable.
I am glad to see that there is a Lancet study that is finally reinvestigating potential links between diet and behavior, because there are MANY of us out there who would love to decrease the medication and make reasonable and effective changes.
I agree this question should be looked at much more. I was very disappointed to see a 2007 review written by a very prominent ADHD researcher and expert dismiss diet as a factor and they only cited one 1980 paper examining food coloring in some sort of dose/ response fashion. In the text they claim that the question of the "Feingold Diet" was reviewed systematically and debunked but they provided zer0 references to back up this strong language. I went to this paper expecting some insight but was fed a line of...What's going on here?
Actually, many doctors for many years have argued that bad diet leads to many problems such as ADHD. Perhaps rather than venting your outrage, you might do a little research. Here is a good place to start: The Ultramind Solution, Dr. Mark Hyman:
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=mark+hyman&x=0&y=0
or...Dr Hyman's website: drhyman.com
Dear farmgirl: I'm with you on this one.
As a young lady who has suffered her whole life with AD/HD, I can say that I'm not too happy about the fact that I have to depend on Concerta just to finish 1-page homework assignment. Actually, I initially tried the diet route (as the thought of going on medication initially scared me) . . . . and to make a long story short, it didn't really help me out that much. So, I ended up choosing medication, mainly as a last resort. Don't get me wrong; I'm not saying that dietary changes are always ineffective . . . . all I'm saying is that this method does NOT work out equally well for everyone. The fact of the matter is, there is no one-size-fits-all treatment for this condition (same thing goes for depression; different patients will react to different treatments in different ways, for we all have different biochemistries, and it usually takes a while for each one of us to figure out what type of treatment best suits our own needs). Part of the problem might be that there's possibly a very strong genetic element in my particular case (father has severe depression and ADHD, paternal grandfather also has depression, paternal great-grand father suffered from schizophrenia . . . . so there's a LONG history of mental illness in my paternal family line).
One thing that makes me really upset is when people believe that ADHD is new. I would argue that only the DEFINITION of ADHD is new, and not the condition itself. If you look back far enough, you can find examples of people who, several centuries ago, strongly manifested the symptoms of what is today known as ADHD (e.g. Mozart, Thomas Edison, Emily Dickenson, Virginia Woolf, etc). Same thing goes for depression: you can find accounts of people THOUSANDS of years ago who were depressed and/or committed suicide . . . . but the trouble is, back then, they didn't call it "depression". Just a few hundred years ago, if you had committed suicide, they would have simply written it off as "oh, he/she died of a broken heart".
So, this all begs the question: if my theory is correct (and I could perhaps be wrong), that people hundreds of years ago had ADHD . . . . then how exactly can we blame diet for this condition? I believe it is very important to remember that our ancestors from 100 years ago were NOT eating the same diet many of us are eating today (e.g. food back then contained WAY fewer chemical preservatives than today, and there really weren't that many greasy Big Mac joints around).
LSD screws with your senses and behaviors, THC screws with your senses and behaviors. MSG screws with your senses of taste and smell and leads to compulsive eating behaviors.
Using LSD and THC will get you tossed in prison.
Ronald McDonald can dress up in a clown suit and feed MSG to babies.
And ADHD is sure as hell not the only food driven epidemic ravaging our society, obesity, diabetes, heart disease and a host of other plagues that are a direct function of America’s corporate diet are the single biggest health issue in the U. S.
But the most important factor in America's food industry is corporate profits, not a healthy diet.
Excellent comment.
You are absolutely right. Why don't more Americans realize this?
That was Mencken. P.T. said a sucker is born every minute.
difficult to know what constitutes normal in a world where nothing does...
what is life's porpoise?
how would one argue against someone advising caution, or suggesting implication, where our food is concerned? has any commercial industry shown regard for the human condition?
that common sense sounds radical indicates how far we have ventured from natural...
Life's porpoise? To swim like a dolphin... I guess. Better adjust your weed dosage, I think you meant to say purpose.
okay, okay, Siouxrose...
more weed it is!
and thank you for your prescription...
(really, I just wanted to put a porpoise in the collective mind this morning...to bring us back to a more primitive, cleaner ocean planet...an intelligent creature playing and mating and rejoicing within teeming waters...call me an anti-Bernaysian)
I thought you did it o. porpoise, and thank you, I like 'em too.
Absolutely no surprise that diet alone can treat ADHD. At the heart of this and many other health problems is a system in this country that allows the same organizations that develop and market drugs to be the ones that decide what studies are done and what results are published. I can't think of an industry more in need of an anti-trust investigation that breaks up the vertical monopolies.
While kids are probably more sensitive to the additives in industrial food, I have to wonder about the impact of the same additives on adult behavior. Might that account for our high incidence of crime and violence. Could they also play a role in the growing incivility of our public discourse.
ADHD is clearly a biological disorder of the brain with a very complex etiology. While there is a very very strong genetic component, no one or even group of genes are sufficient to cause the disorder. It is very likely that those who have genetic vulnerabilities may respond to environmental factors with neurobehavioral abnormalities. Examples would include prenatal nicotine exposure, lead or mercury exposure, or additives in processed foods. However, neuroimaging studies have shown real differences in the brains of children with ADHD compared to non-ADHD kids. It is a stretch to claim that changes in diet would reverse these differences but the question merits further investigation. BTW, a Healthy diet is worth it even if it doesn't cure ADHD.
ADHD is not "clearly a biological disorder." There is good evidence that it is a normal condition in a significant portion of the population. The problem is that our life styles and diets are not "normal" in an evolutionary sense.
First, the impairment that ADHD people experience is real. ADHD people are at greater risk for automobile accidents, drug and alcohol abuse, conduct disorder, social and occupational impairments, Anxiety disorders, etc. The list goes on and on. Neuropsychological profiles based on testing and neuroimaging confirm the biological basis. This is only "normal" in that it happens with some regularity.
Second, I have no doubt that environmental factors play a role. The authors have demonstrated a significant effect of diet using their measure of ADHD. This study should be replicated and followed up with more variables to be considered. What about other measures of behavior and diagnostic criteria? Are the effects stable over time? Do the children who benefit still meet the criteria for diagnosis? Can they reduce their medication or stop usage altogether? Do their behavioral changes correlate with neuropsychological assesments?
The bottom line is I am very encouraged by this study and glad that my children eat locally grown organic whole foods
Isn't that what Tom said, we have evolved with those things in the environment that sustain us, the problem is how we have impacted the environment (driving,drug use, alcohol use, standards of conduct, occupational illness) from an evolutionary standard that obviously has drawbacks. Many occupations themselves are a responsible pathology. I don't think you can wait for someone to tell you the food you are eating is bad for you, the air you breath is polluted with particulates that your body deems foreign, your home is filled with indoor pollutants, the water you drink is also compromised and treated with chemicals your species did not evolve with. My neighbors son goes off the charts after eating a bowl of cereal with sugar added. I guess that would include the standards of conduct, ADHD might be considered differently in an envirnoment that required those attributes, but in this one it is considered a disease.
That is an interesting idea, if I understand you right, that the traits associated with ADHD may be very adaptive to either the individual or the group in certain environments. It is a fact that adults with ADHD in their 30's have been found to be more likely self-employed, supporting the idea that maybe there is a societal niche for these people. However, many people with ADHD are desperate to find relief from their symptoms. They don't want to be fired from their dream job for being perceived as a slacker, impulsive, disorganized, and a poor planner. They recognize their own inability to follow through on a task and accomplish goals. Whatever their goal might be.
Wartman: 'Call me old-fashioned'
That is old-fashioned. New-fashioned is to make a buck off selling disease to people and then selling the cure.
please don't get me thinking one might 'accidentally' release radioactivity to generate cancers and other health complications...
expensive condition, cancer...money to be made on many fronts...
That's not old fashioned at all except for the use of the word "cure." They don't want to deal with diseases they might cure. They want "conditions" they can "manage" with on-them-for-the-rest-of-your live medications.
If the study mentioned in the article was designed properly, and the analysis was done properly, the results suggest that more work should be done. Proper design and then replication by others are how one develops confidence in scientific studies.
If the work can be replicated, then someone needs to start looking for the biochemical mechanism(s) which can produce the disorder, in the absence of a genetic tendency to produce it. But that kind of work is not going to be funded by the pharmaceutical industry or the food industry. And even NIH might not fund such a study because its review panels usually contain representatives from the various affected industries.
But just because there is a strong genetic factor involved does not mean that some other factor or factors cannot be involved.
Is this study suggesting that eating right can enhance your health? No wonder the doctors and big pharma are concerned. What a revolutionary concept!
Stop Psychiatric Labeling Of Kids
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DP8wneiVeqg
To start I think it unwise to use the word STUPID in the title. The body and genome is embedded in and is part of the environment and cannot be isolated. To illustrate: I have a genetic predisposition for celiac sprue as did my mother and both my daughters. It is caused by an immune reaction to gluten. The ancestors that I inherited the condition from 12,000 years ago didn't get celiac sprue because there was little or no gluten in their diet. So it is both genetic and environmental. I do very well on a 10,000 B C diet (B C stands for before croissants). Diabetes II and gout and a plethora of other conditions are because of genetic sensitivity to certain diets. Everybody on the same diet does not get the condition, so it is entirely logical that ADHD is the same for at least some people. I have a stepson diagnosed with ADHD that responded very well to being on a wilderness trek that eliminated refined foods and wheat from his diet. For him it definitely worked and there are many other studies that support the articles conclusions.
ANTISANDMAN
While I made the connection to Clinton's campaign slogan I would agree that one should avoid implying that ones' audience could be stupid. (And the Clinton campaign's mocking use of the word wasn't all that smart either.)
Having said that, sometimes editors punch up titles to boost readership and in my own case I've spent hours writing articles then minutes thinking of a title that just didn't work.
America's corporate produced diet, and the health problems it creates, is a story that needs a lot more attention than it gets.
Good article.
That the expanding diagnosed cases of ADHD is to a large degree caused by the "food-like" products profligately marketed at children is one more example of how capitalism makes us sick, and then makes beaucoup bucks on "treating" us (making us more sick) for the sickness it manufactured.
I think you are over interpreting the results of this one study. But your overall point rings very true.
These studies have been going on for decades. They are always dismissed as "unscientific". There was a study in the 70's that showed "no statistical difference" among the groups of children. Interestingly, the only children who were affected by the food additives were the smallest ones. I don't think anyone ever followed up with research using only small for age children.
Testimonly was presented in Ted Kennedy's sub-committee hearing that treatment costs of sick children (allergies, asthma, multiple medical conditions could be reduced 80% by using diet, allergy testing/avoidance, and appropriate nutritional supplements. {Can search Ted Kennedy and Dr Hyman--his testimony starts on p.17. It is the link to findarticles.com and should be on the first results page of a google search}
This should not be up for debate. Anyone using drugs to treat ADHD (actually any chronic disease) without doing an allergy, diet and nutritional status assessment as well as a lifestyle assessment and tests for chemical poisons and heavy metals should be sued for malpractice. Anyone with an IQ over 80 should understand that if you eat and are exposed to large amounts of manmade chemicals as well as unnatural food and inadequate physical activity you are ripe for chronic disease. Genetics will determine who and what but, in the aggregate, it's not a good bet.
Then, of course, there is the removal of most right-brain activities from school--art, music, gym. As others have pointed out, some kids may just need to run more.
Causes are multi-factorial and complex for just about everything in life. Treating symptoms is a fool's errand.
out of a country of some 300+ million, we're talking about 5 million diagnoses and 3 million prescriptions...
whether I agree with these numbers or not, that leaves 295+ million Americans who, theoretically, don't have ADHD...
given our societal trends, what do we admire about the vast majority who are not ADHD, that we would want the other 3, or 5, million to be more like them?
if all current psychological roads lead to ruin, why bicker about which one you are on, or someone else?
what's to brag about, Mr. or Mrs. non-ADHD?
we're all living on a warming Nuclearth, now...
it could be right, but as science it is totally unconvincing - just from the abstract, they looked at to few kids for to short a period of time
if this were on the opposite shoe to most commondreams readers (study shows $ drugs from big pharma improve ADHD..) most of you would agree with me
they looked at 100 kids for a few months; as a matter of
SCIENCE
that is a hint, not at all definitive
It really is that simple: you eat artificial, you act artificial.
"You are what you eat" - is true on every level.
Nothing could be more obvious: input = output.
It seems like the people here that are getting upset at this article have missed the point. The author certainly has an opinion about this issue, but that is standard for any article posted on Common Dreams. The study she is citing, however, is a different matter. As it states, "Pessler does say that there are some children and adults who might benefit from pharmaceuticals but her research indicates that far too many are being medicated unnecessarily..." Seems obvious to me given the current state of our food industry, but then again, that is just an opinion.
(redundant post due to network error, deleted)
There's good information in this article but it's a mistake to blame ADHD symptoms entirely on food. ADHD and hyperactivity and other symptoms of dietary problems are not the same thing. ADHD is the result of a different brain topology in which the prefrontal cortex does not have full voluntary control to marshal other parts of the brain to focus on something. This brain type does not do well being asked to focus on something displeasing or mundane; it will not bring its full resources to bear on such a thing.
This brain type is a herd of cats - they're going to do what they want to do, but if you think that a herd of cats can't come together with a purpose, crack a can of tuna around one. If it hits on something to be passionately involved in, it can hyperfocus and achieve a lot. That's why it's reasonably common; with people like da Vinci, Einstein, and Mozart having been this type of person, it's clearly advantageous to some purposes and gets selected for. The human race is best off having multiple brain types including this one. This is not a disorder, this is diversity. It's only a disorder in our society because we've commodified people and expect them to be identical, interchangeable parts. It's like asking a repairman to come equipped with only hammers.
That said, ADHD (sic) is more vulnerable to problems common to the modern Western diet than most. We're all vulnerable to bad effects from junk carbohydrates, but when it fuels, for example, an overgrowth of candida fungi in the intestine, the hormonal shift that causes has results similar to negative symptoms of ADHD and a host of other things. This is definitely one reason ADHD is overdiagnosed.
The way we deal with issues in our society is also screwed up by a pharmaceutical industry that runs on refining extracts and chemicals, patenting them, and marketing them dishonestly. This is hardly a safe way to deal with life or health; what gets results in a short study doesn't deal with the larger issue. Having ADHD myself and having been prescribed adderall, I found my health destroyed by an already high metabolism revved to a whole another level while my appetite was largely erased - a far more serious problem than what it was supposed to treat, which boiled down trying to use an ADHD brain like something it isn't.
Let's not get tricked into a false choice of saying either Big Pharma is right or it's all just bad food. That's where I see this article leaning towards, and that would be a mistake. This is a genetic, physiological trait. It was around before there was Western junk food or pharmaceuticals. What's at issue, though, is the inflexible commodified society we live in and the chemicals we're subjecting ourselves to, which should concern anyone no matter what our makeup.
The real problem here is a societal disorder into which some people can't or won't fit, and I say good on them.
Yowsa, do I like your response! Neuro diversity is at the heart of this "problem". Yes, there are real difficulties in our society for folks of this brain type and we need to have viable alternatives to troubled activities like driving. Sounds like a vote for more mass transit. Being commodified when one is a human leads to depression conditions like the one in our society, 1in 4 or 1 in 5, suffering this year, depending whose study one sites. Not getting one's needs met because one is not as "marketable" predictably leads to further decline of the individual.
I work with ADD/ADHD kids and getting them to understand themselves and how to get support in adapting to our societies work and learning environments are some of the main foci of my work. The other, of course, is educating more "neurotypical" teachers, parents, administrators, bosses, and social worker types how little changes when we care enough to do it, makes everyone happier. I am not completely against medication but even when it's effective, it's usually no panacea. Many times whether adult or child, the medications aren't as effective after a while. And the side effects are very difficult to manage with many; so much so that meds must be discontinued, no matter how beneficial for learning and "behavior management". I agree with your comments that society needs to adapt; that it's self-interested of "normal" people to embrace what diverse thinkers can offer us because we're all exhibits of differing brain processing on varied spectrums and measures of performance. It's time to seek being "ok" with being as much as "doing". I hope your last comment dovetails with a spirit of universal self-acceptance which will promote that attitude for all of us, labeled or not.
PS. when previewing this comment I noticed an unwanted "edit" by the software used on site here. I do not want my use, in context, of the word d*pr*ss!@n linked to something else without my direct approval or permission. I would hate to leave this community but this strikes me as a deal breaker. Anyone else?
The blue highlite/linking feature which I was referring to above, disappeared once the comment was actually posted in the thread, thankfully. It seems to only occur as one is writing, previewing or editing one's comment.
Sugar or high fructose corn syrup in almost all processed food. Artficial additives. Less exercise. Hormones and worse in animal feed. "Fruit" bars: pureed, powdered fruit plus high fructose corn syrup.Nothing fresh and whole. Why is this a suprise?