From: yasu@ll.mit.edu (Alan Yasutovich)
Newsgroups: sci.med
Subject: Re: Attention Deficit Disorder Resources
Date: 7 Oct 92 12:28:25 GMT
Organization: MIT Lincoln Laboratory

In article <1992Oct6.214650.21835@cbfsb.cb.att.com> kja@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (krista.j.anderson) writes:
>In article <1992Oct5.125428.5866@newstand.syr.edu>, mdkline@rodan.acs.syr.edu (Mark D. Kline) writes:
>> Fact is, a few weeks of a medication trial with a reasonable schedule
>> of observation (on the part of parents, teachers, and physician) can
>> establish whether a particular child suspected of ADD can benefit from
>> medication, and the risks of such a trial are very small, (assuming the
>> absence of contraindications). "Drug dependency" is really a non
>> sequitor here - we don't consider epileptics "drug dependent" in a
>> judgemental way because they have seizures if they stop their
>> medication.   What if the medication would be extremely helpful to the
>> child?  Wouldn't it then be tragic if the child was denied a treatment
>> of value because the parents didn't believe in it?
>
>This is very well put.
>

	Yes it is.  And isn't it a pity when parents are short-sighted
	enough to not eliminate a substance from their childs life
	that is bothering them, rather than to continue and give them
	a pill or an antedote.  I mean if you are allergic to cats
	do you keep cats and take antihistimines, or get rid of the
	cats.


	This is simple.


>Steve Dyer and Mark Kline have given good responses on this thread,
>but I also want to post because I think it's sad that some children
>are being mistreated.  While I don't particularly care about adults
>who prefer quacks to established medicine, it makes me feel very
>bad to think about the innocent children who are the victims of
>their parents' pride.

	I have listened to Dr. Feingold, and Dr. Rapp.  Both established
	members of the medical community.

	This reminds me of a TRUE story I saw in a movie on TV.
	Two girls were born. One with an inherited heart problem of
	some type, and the other perfectly normal.  After birth and
	initial confirmation of the problem, the babies got swapped.
	The traced the two girls lives.  As they grew the one with
	the "problem" obviously got no medication.  The one WITHOUT
	a problem received all the medication that the other one would
	have.

	The one with the problem grew, ran, played.  The one WITHOUT
	the problem was tired, sickly, etc., etc.  All a result
	of this medicine.

	Nice stuff, these drugs.  Nice reliable people, these doctors.

>or intolerances at work.  Allergies do *not* directly cause 
>psychological or behavioral symptoms.

	These are *NOT* allergies.  They will *NOT* show up in allergy tests.


	You know, I wish more of the "experts" on this net would have
	simply read my letter that I posted.  I explained all this.


	I feel like a person in a job interview.  The interviewer has
	had your resume.  But they sit there and scrutinize it, when
	all along they should have known it.

-- 
	Alan Yasutovich
	"inquiring  (and nosey) minds WANT TO KNOW!!!"
	I can remember when "safe sex" meant having a padded headboard!!
	Tick Tock.....Tick Tock......Tick Tock .....Tick Tock......
Newsgroups: sci.med