ADHD Vitamin Therapy Option
Related Topics
Brain TrainingCognitive BehavioralEducational Specialist | Marijuana AddictionParent ParticipationSupport Group |
Dr. S. drs...@doctoryourself.com
There are several articles concerning ADD/ADHD, mood disorders, anxiety and related topics archived at http://doctoryourself.com There have been quite a few well controlled scientific studies on these subjects Abram Hoffer, MD, is one of many researchers checking in on the side of megavitamin therapy. ( http://doctoryourself.com/biblio_hoffer.html ) You might want to start by reading http://doctoryourself.com/hoffer_ABC.html http://doctoryourself.com/hoffer_psychosis.html http://doctoryourself.com/hoffer_paradigm.html http://doctoryourself.com/hoffer_editorial.html http://doctoryourself.com/hoffer_JOM.html
--
200 articles and 2,700 scientific references on natural therapeutics are posted at http://doctoryourself.com I have no financial connection with the supplement industry. Subscriptions to the DOCTOR YOURSELF NEWSLETTER are free of charge at http://doctoryourself.com/newsmail.html Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
George of the jungle george_of_the_jun...@my-deja.com
Well it says on the web site" Dr.Hoffer has over 500 publications to date, yet a search of Medline's ten million research papers will fail to turn up even a single entry under his name." There must be a conspiracy aganist him.
--
--George "He paid no attention to the rumors, which he should have listened to..." Keiko Sofia Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Caitriona Mac Fhiodhbhuidhe cather...@whitepine.com
I have serious concerns with postings such as this. Sites such as this tend to overlook the fact that AD/HD is due to a *physiological* difference in brain structure. As an example, I have taken a quote from the following referenced site: "The best part of Dr. Hoffer's ABC of Natural Nutrition for Children is that it is a book of practical, positive advice. Criticisms and even lawsuits over the hazards of tranquilizers, Ritalin, and related pharmaceuticals are on the rise, but neither court nor controversy can cure your child. "Battered parents" (Hoffer's term) need to know what to do, and now. Saying no to drugs" also requires saying "yes" to something else. That something else is nutrition, properly employed." This implies that all instances of AD/HD are the result of poor nutrition rather than acknowledging that AD/Hd is the result of brain structure. (Please note the following p***age.) http://www.nimh.nih.gov/events/pradhd.htm "Subtle structural abnormalities in the brain circuit that inhibits thoughts have been confirmed in the first comprehensive brain imaging study of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). Difficulty staying mentally focused is a primary symptom of ADHD, which affects about 5 percent of school age children. Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) scans of 57 boys with ADHD, aged 5-18, also revealed that their brains were more symmetrical than those of 55 age-matched controls." Are we to presume that the good Dr. Hoffer has found a way through mega-vitamin dosage to change the physical structure of the brain? If so, how close is the dosage of the oil-soluble vitamins to toxic levels? What kind of tightrope must be walked to insure maximum benefit without toxicity?
IMO, these issues must be thoroughly studied before this can be a legitimate therapy for AD/HD.
Kitten
Caitriona Mac Fhiodhbhuidhe cather...@whitepine.com
I've seen Dr. S's posts in the health NGs. From what I've seen, he's along the lines of a kook.
There have been discussions about Dr. Hoffer on the alt health mail list in which I participate. Apparently, his theories have yet to be proven... or disproven.
Kitten
Mark Probert markpr...@my-deja.com
Hoffer or Saul ;) On PublicMed, I found several different Hoffer A's. However, NONE have published anything as much a letter to the editor on ADHD.
--
January 20, 2001: The first day of the Theocratic States of America.
"The core of the 1st Amendment is that we don't vote on religion in this country and allow the majority to use the instruments of government to spread the faith." Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Decimal notr...@centurytel.net
Standard quackery. It's not necessary to disprove something that hasn't been substantiated in the first place. It's called the burden of proof.
-- Decimal My Attention Deficit Disorder is non-attentive, not hyperactive.
If I run into a wall, I do not bounce!
Nessa ladybug0...@home.com
On Mon, 12 Mar 2001 16:21:20 -0500, Decimal wrote (in message <3AAD3DD0.848CF...@centurytel.net>): Ever hear of the null hypothesis?
nessa
--
Someday we'll look back on this moment and plow into a parked car.
Evan Davis
Decimal notr...@centurytel.net
http://www.graphpad.com/instatman/Whatisanullhypothesis_.htm It sounds like an excellent tool for disproving something that *has* been considered substantiated. This can also show a connection that was before missed. Do I understand it correctly?
But I'm afraid I still don't understand what you're getting at.
-- Decimal My Attention Deficit Disorder is non-attentive, not hyperactive.
If I run into a wall, I do not bounce!
Dave Knapp d...@usa.net
Umm, Nessa -- that's what Decimal just described! For _any_ new treatment, the null hypothesis is that it has no effect.
-- Dave
Nessa ladybug0...@home.com
On Tue, 13 Mar 2001 3:53:35 -0500, Dave Knapp wrote (in message <punratopglqta8qg59e72in626m54d1...@4ax.com>): got a point there... but the way to do it is to show that the null hypothesis is true. as far as I'm concerned it really is to show it's wrong. but then I've always had a touch of ADD in me.
never did very well at statistics.
nessa
--
Someday we'll look back on this moment and plow into a parked car.
Evan Davis
Decimal notr...@centurytel.net
I doubt that ADD has anything to do with the ability to recognize logical fallacies. It might take a little extra training, that's all.
Now I could hypothesis that Jupiter's red spot is created by billions of tiny, invisible gnomes dancing in a huge circle and waving colored sparklers, but really *nobody* should buy into it unless I can support this bizarre idea in any way. But hey, if I can sell people books on quackery because people don't do much in the way of critical thinking, why not? It's sounds like such a good career that it's no wonder why so many people are doing it. All it takes are appealing ideas (like vitamins to treat ADD), intellectual dishonesty, hopeful but ignorant customers and a complete lack of real science. $Ca-ching!$ Sound logic is the cornerstone of science, the same thing that has brought us such a large base of knowledge about ADD. The idea that we could fool ourselves is crucial to scientific research. This is why we use placeboes, double-blind trials, repeatable experiments and scrutinize all the data obsessively. This is where the null hypothesis comes into play. Science has to be the only field where the people involved are often *thrilled* when you point out a mistake they've made.
*shrug* But I suppose it doesn't hurt to take vitamins, especially if you can fool yourself into thinking they help manage ADD. (We don't live in a lab.) Anyway, taking vitamins is good for you most of the time. I'm careful not to take too much of any nutrient except for C -- which has no danger except for diarrhea.
My previous response: **** http://www.graphpad.com/instatman/Whatisanullhypothesis_.htm It sounds like an excellent tool for disproving something that *has* been considered substantiated. This can also show a connection that was before missed. Do I understand it correctly?
But I'm afraid I still don't understand what you're getting at.
****
-- Decimal My Attention Deficit Disorder is non-attentive, not hyperactive.
If I run into a wall, I do not bounce!
Do you take criticism of the things that you hold near and dear as an attack on *yourself*? Where did you learn this ridiculous behavior?
J. Clarke nosp...@nospam1.nospam1
Not quite sure what you are saying here. The way the null hypothesis is used is that you ***ume that it's true until you have evidence that shows that it is false.
--
--
--John Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net (used to be jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
Decimal notr...@centurytel.net
She's using scientific jargon to say "It's ok to believe whatever you want regardless of the lack of evidence." Which isn't wrong, just misusing the language. The "null hypothesis" is only a tool used in experiments or studies. Heck, it has the word "hypothesis" right in it!
It has nothing whatsoever to do with the burden of proof. If you cried "Null hypothesis!" when asked for proof in the middle of a serious debate, you'd be laughed right off the stage.
It's sort of like a vacuum cleaner salesman coming to your house, grinding mud into your carpet and then asking you to prove that their product is *not* able to clean up the mess. He or she might make some sales, but most consumers know better.
-- Decimal My Attention Deficit Disorder is non-attentive, not hyperactive.
If I run into a wall, I do not bounce!
Do you take criticism of the things that you hold near and dear as an attack on *yourself*? Where did you learn this ridiculous behavior?
an ...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Catherine Woodgold)
Yes, but I see possible confusion over the meaning of the word "***ume".
In mathematics, one often proves that a statement X is false by first ***uming that X is true, then making deductions based on that ***umption, then coming to a ridiculous conclusion, and finally stating that therefore X must be false. It's called "reductio ad absurdum". Clearly in this case, "***uming" X is true has nothing whatsoever to do with actually believing that X is true.
The use of the ***umption of the null hypothesis in statistics is really quite similar and analogous.
You "***ume" that the null hypothesis is true, then make predictions based on that about how unlikely it would be for something to happen (such as everybody in group A just happening to suddenly get better while everybody in group B just happens to stay sick), then you observe just such a supposedly unlikely event, and you reject the null hypothesis.
Again, "***uming" that the null hypothesis is true has nothing to do with actually believing that it's true. It's just a way of forming a framework in which equations can be formulated to prove it false, as in reductio ad absurdum.
... or you fail to observe an unlikely event and you do not reject the null hypothesis. However, this has nothing to do with providing supporting evidence for the null hypothesis.
A very common fallacy these days goes like this. A scientist conducts an experiment that proves nothing. Perhaps the scientist was hoping to prove something but the data didn't work out that way. Anyway, the scientist goes ahead and publishes a paper saying something like "We did not find any statistically significant support for H1". Or even "We found no statistically significant correlation." The media then get ahold of this and misquote it as "They proved that there is no correlation," when in fact they didn't prove anything at all!
I see this over and over again.
Anyone who "***umes" a null hypothesis in the sense of basing decisions in real life on the ***umption that H0 is true in the absence of any evidence one way or the other is making decisions based on blind faith.
Sometimes it's better to make decisions based on the precautionary principle. If a small, harmless action will make a big difference if H1 turns out to be true ... why just "***ume" that H1 is false in the absence of any proof?
--
Cathy Woodgold TISSATAAFL Ottawa, Ontario, Canada http://www.ncf.carleton.ca/~an588/ an...@freenet.carleton.ca Inability is an abstract thing involving comparison with alternate universes; it cannot be experienced.
J. Clarke nosp...@nospam1.nospam1
No dear. You don't make predictions using statistics until such time as you have evidence on which to base those predictions.
What you do is analyze the results using statistical methods to determine whether your observation is in fact a real effect or noisy data.
No dear. You set up an experiment. You perform statistical analysis on the results. You find that the probability is 99.9% that there is no effect. Therefore you do not reject the null hypothesis and thus you ***ume, in the real world, that there is no effect.
The null hypothesis does not need "supporting evidence".
Yes, they did. They proved that the correlation in that particular experiment was zero. And in that case there is NO reason to believe that there is any effect to be observed and every reason to believe that there is not.
Anyone who ***umes the converse is also making ***umptions on blind faith. Or engaging in wishful thinking.
If it is truly harmless, the potential gain is very large, and one doesn't spend an inordinate amount of time or money on it, then there's no reason not to. OTOH, in the absence of evidence, if you ***ume that ingesting some substance is "harmless" then you are again acting on blind faith.
If you carry your viewpoint to an extreme, you could ***ume that every drop of water which is available to you contains a deadly poison, so on the precautionary principle you die of thirst.
I still want to know where one can get this free lunch.
--
--
--John Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net (used to be jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
J. Clarke nosp...@nospam1.nospam1
This is true. When you are willing to accept such a possibility, let us know, dear.
Not that I expect much from someone who believes that there is such a thing as a free lunch.
--
--
--John Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net (used to be jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
Decimal notr...@centurytel.net
=) Well, you seemed to be coming at it from more of a mathematical standpoint, and J. Clarke was explaining along the lines of real-world experiments.
-- Decimal My Attention Deficit Disorder is non-attentive, not hyperactive.
If I run into a wall, I do not bounce!
Do you take criticism of the things that you hold near and dear as an attack on *yourself*? Where did you learn this ridiculous behavior?
Decimal notr...@centurytel.net
*shakes head in dismay* There is no "disagreeing" with a point like the boolean one you were debating. Either you're right, or you're wrong. Of course, when you end the conversation what one tends to remain unsettled.
-- Decimal My Attention Deficit Disorder is non-attentive, not hyperactive.
If I run into a wall, I do not bounce!
Do you take criticism of the things that you hold near and dear as an attack on *yourself*? Where did you learn this ridiculous behavior?
an ...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Catherine Woodgold)
Learned?? I thought it was instinctive.
--
Cathy Woodgold TISSATAAFL Ottawa, Ontario, Canada http://www.ncf.carleton.ca/~an588/ an...@freenet.carleton.ca Inability is an abstract thing involving comparison with alternate universes; it cannot be experienced.
"Terra Celeste" c...@21stcentury.net
I don't know anything about statistics and barely made it through Junior High School Algebra,and as such have nothing to contribute here.
However,being the non-mathematical and somewhat incompletely educated sort of person that I am,I must say that these "more knowledgeable and more correct than thou" discussions are getting tiresome. Additionally tiresome are the patronizing tones from a few people here. Even though it is hard for any of us to stay on topic (and that is a fun aspect of this group),could we please save the insulting attitudes for the trolls when we are feeling the uncontrollable impulse to be mean? The word "support" is part of this newsgroup's title.
...
an ...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Catherine Woodgold)
By the way, re discussion on statistics, I posted under a new thread "Statistics and/or Truth", with followup to misc.health.alternative.
--
Cathy Woodgold TISSATAAFL Ottawa, Ontario, Canada http://www.ncf.carleton.ca/~an588/ an...@freenet.carleton.ca Inability is an abstract thing involving comparison with alternate universes; it cannot be experienced.
an ...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Catherine Woodgold)
Is the headshaking an indication of dismay only, or is there also a nuance of negativity, indicating perhaps another boolean disagreement?
I don't know what you mean by no disagreeing.
If the "yes it is/no it isn't" J. Clarke and I were engaging in wasn't disagreement, then what is?
The situation is more complicated than simply "either you're right, or you're wrong". I said more than one thing; some of them could have been right and some wrong.
And we didn't define the terms we were using --
a situation that can easily lead to the discovery, after the dust has settled, that both people were right.
Even if it's obvious that only one of two positions can be right, and even if one believes firmly that one knows which one, one can still show respect for the other person, at least by refraining from insults.
Such disagreements do happen; didn't we just see an example? Are they so impossible that we have to deny their existence or attack somebody to make them go away?
--
Cathy Woodgold TISSATAAFL Ottawa, Ontario, Canada http://www.ncf.carleton.ca/~an588/ an...@freenet.carleton.ca Inability is an abstract thing involving comparison with alternate universes; it cannot be experienced.
Caitriona Mac Fhiodhbhuidhe kit...@whitepine.com
HEAR, HEAR!!!
J. Clarke nosp...@nospam1.nospam1
She's throwing around words she doesn't understand in the hope that someone will think she knows what she's talking about. I believe the term that applies is "bafflegab".
--
--
--John Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net (used to be jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
| To Top |