Dexedrine and feeling drained
Related Topics
mnsoccerf ...@aol.com (soccerfan)
Subject: Dexderine and feeling drained From: mnsoccerf...@aol.com (soccerfan) Date: 4/6/01 8:29 PM Eastern Daylight Time Message-id: <20010406202911.27990.00000394@ng-ft1.aol.com> Subject: Dexedrine and feeling drained From: mnsoccerf...@aol.com (soccerfan) Date: 4/6/01 6:19 PM Eastern Daylight Time Message-id: <20010406181959.21544.00002296@ng-cm1.aol.com> I have a rather strong case of ADD and have to take a lot of dexedrine in order to to fufill the demands of my rigorous schedule in grad school. The problem is that the next day, for instance, when I go for a run or some other kind of workout, my muscular endurance is terrible. It is like my muscles are completely of energy at the very onset of exercise. I am 30 years old, and in decent enough shape. While I am not on the medicine while running, I am absolutely certain that my extensive use of it is the cause. On vacations, for example, when I am not on the medication I do not have this problem. All other things being equal, I can run 3-4 miles comfortably if I have not taken the medicine for a few days. My doctor is out of town for a few months, so I don't have the normal avenues for having such a concern addressed. For the time being I am in a bind with the demands of school, and the meds work extremely well; but I hate this effect. Can someone tell me what it is that is being depleted? No other negative effects are apparent. Any suggestions on taking some supplement, ie. extra pot***ium, or whatever is missing.? Is it the the natural creatine in the body that is broken down? If so, is there any benefit to taking it in supplement form? Thank you very much for any help! Please reply via email, as I have trouble connecting to the newsgroups.
Thanks again Sam
"Jeffrey Peter, M.D." kidsdoc2...@hotmail.com
Your doctor is out of town for a few months without backup? I think you need to find another doctor who provides backup when he is out of town for a few months.
Jeff Utz ...
Steven B. Harris sbhar...@ix.netcom.com@ix.netcom.com
Well, this used to be called a speed-trip followed by a strung-out let down. Now that we have defined a disease called ADHD which lets students take a lot of speed to study in school (illegal as hell years ago, and illegal as hell now if you do it illicitly) I suppose we'll just have to find another more polite and politically correct term for being drug dependent, strung-out, and in withdrawal, when you don't take all the uppers.
But I can't think of one.
Why don't you use your down days to practice the following nasal whine: "My DOOOctor says I NEEEEEED it!! It's a prescrIIIIption!
I'm not the same as a druuuuuugie! How DAAAAARE you??" This will stand you in good stead with those who take a more cynical view of what you and your beloved medical profession is doing, in kahoots.
All this, while this country has more people in jail per capita than any other in the world. Over half of them there because they felt that drugs gave them a boost and performance edge. Why, the cheaters.
Throw away the key.
Can you do that with a really self-righteous whine? "Throooow away the KEEEEY!" Practice.
Steve Harris, M.D.
And you can quote me.
mnsoccerf ...@aol.com (soccerfan)
A little quick to judge, perhaps, Doctor Harris?
"Beachhouse" sendnom...@please.com
i completely agree with you.
"Steven B. Harris" <sbhar...@ix.netcom.com@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message ...
Steven B. Harris sbhar...@ix.netcom.com@ix.netcom.com
Nope. Show me a student who needs dexedrine to study, and I'll show you a student who needs dexedrine to study. The legalities make no difference whatsoever. None. Zip.
montyfuller ...@aol.com (MontyFuller675)
Explain, please.
mnsoccerf ...@aol.com (soccerfan)
Explain, please.
"Angel" anonym...@none.net
It's rather human to judge. There is nothing wrong with judging others.
Actually, it's even sanctioned in the bible, if you read the New Testatment accurately.
What's wrong is taking drugs to function.
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
Steven B. Harris sbhar...@ix.netcom.com@ix.netcom.com
There is no difference between a student who "needs" dexedrine to study, and an athelete who "needs" EPO to run a marathon or "needs" testosterone to run the 100 meter dash. Amphetamines are performance enhancers for everyone, don't you know. The Germans came out on dexedrine in the Battle of the Bulge, and the Allies throught they were fighting madmen. Perhaps the Allied invasion forces actually had "battle-fatigue deficit disorder," and didn't know it; what do you think? Anyway, after a few days, the weather got better and the Germans collapsed. That's the way the stuff works. The student who complains he feels fatigued on the days he doesn't get his speed is no different than the heroin user who is strung out and hurts all over. So? What do you want me to tell you?
mnsoccerf ...@aol.com (soccerfan)
some of the side effects.
Steven B. Harris sbhar...@ix.netcom.com@ix.netcom.com
There's nothing wrong with taking drugs to function, so long as it's on the up-and-up, and everybody gets the same chance to see what makes them run best. What I cannot stand is the hypocrisy of doing some of this, in this of all puritanical societies when it comes to the "war on drugs" (a.k.a. the war on the undercl***).
The underlying problem is that we've set up a society where we handicap people as though the average person was competing in the Special Olympics. Now, in this olympics, we don't know what to do with performance-enhancing drugs, and performance-robbing diseases.
We've got drugs to fix your shyness, drugs to focus your mind, drugs to make your kids study better and grow to be taller. But what if you don't show up for work in the morning? Perhaps you're sleeping off a bender. Perhaps you're coming down from 3 days of Ritalin or cocaine (does it make a difference which?). Perhaps you're suffering from post traumatic stress syndrome and took too much alprazolam to drag your butt out of bed. How do we tell all that from you just being a lazy louse? Well, we haven't a prayer without knowing all about your medical history, do we? So the intimate details of THAT, are now everybody's business, aren't they? No, you don't like that? Sorry.
Welcome to the modern world.
I don't like it. I suggest instead that if you're going to have an "olympics of life," where you give out prizes and medals and money and recognition for performance, you've either got to have an entirely drug-free olympics (no exceptions, period), or else you've got to have a "no drug rules at all" olympics. Anything in between is inherantly unfair, because it simply favors the biggest whiners who've managed to make themselves out to be the sickest, so they can get the best performance-enhancing drugs and treatments as "fixes" for supposedly being "ill." And no, before you ask, there is no objective test for AHDD, nor any evidence that there's any difference between AHDD kids and anyone else of their own sex. And we have 20 times the incidence of it in the US that they do in the UK. That sounds like a social disease to me. And I don't mean V.D.
I further suggest that when the kind of Whiner's Olympics I describe, and the one which we now play, is backed with police and guns and prisons for those who haven't played the whining game properly, the whole thing really starts to stink like no social ill this side of slavery.
Does that clarify my point of view any?
SBH
mnsoccerf ...@aol.com (soccerfan)
That was never in question. I was simply asking about a way to lessen some of the side effects.
"Beachhouse" sendnom...@please.com
It *is* the question -- because that makes the "side effects" question moot.
"CBI" replytothegr...@spamblock.nospam
In other words - you don't believe in ADD?
--
CBI, MD "Steven B. Harris" <sbhar...@ix.netcom.com@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message ...
"CBI" replytothegr...@spamblock.nospam
I would suggest that you stick to whatever part of medicine it is that you do understand.
--
CBI, MD "Steven B. Harris" <sbhar...@ix.netcom.com@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message ...
"Steve Harris" sbhar...@ix.netcom.com
Comment: Alas, I understand this part where the doctors are expected to play the part of legalized pushers, all too well. But you're quite welcome to explain how and where you think I'm wrong. You can start with the biological basis for "attention defficit disorder." Is it a disease? What makes you think so?
What is your evidence? Why do we have 20 times more of it than in (say) England? Do you think they have worse doctors there,and are missing 19 out of 20 cases? Golly.
If you think you know more medicine than I do, bub, here's your golden chance to teach me. Don't forget the literature cites.
I think this will be a lot of fun. But I think on this one you'll wimp out long before I have the pleasure of rubbing your nose in this properly.
Steve Harris, MD You can email me at sbharris...@ix.netcom.com But remove the numerals in the address first.
============================== Our nada who art in Nada Nada be thy nada..
-- Dada Hemingway ==========================
"Steve Harris" sbhar...@ix.netcom.com
I "believe" in it the same way I "believe" in "obesity." Is "obesity" an objectively "real" pathology? If you push it far enough, I suppose.
The question of what objectively "is" or "isn't" a "disease" is often akin to arguing about angels and pinheads. In any case, there is, in cases such as these, no bright dividing line between "illness" and "health." Now, even if there was, that wouldn't necessarily mean the wise treatment for "obesity" was Dexatrim.
And (even for the sake of argument) even if Dexatrim did indeed work for some "obese" people, I would still be the last to suggest that people holding an M.D. might have such Godlike powers of discernment as to to be able to tell, apriori and ex cathedra, just who those people would be, and should be.
Or that society should have the arrogance to imprison those who wanted to make that decision for themselves, or experiment to find out for themselves what category they (by the grace of genetics and chance) happened to fit into.
SBH
--
Steve Harris You can email me at sbharris...@ix.netcom.com But remove the numerals in the address first.
============================== Our nada who art in Nada Nada be thy nada..
-- Dada Hemingway ==========================
Paul P...@hawaii.rr.com
On Thu, 12 Apr 2001 22:57:29 -0600, "Steve Harris" How about depression, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia?? Are any of these illnesses?? Where is the bright dividing line between the above "conditions" and "health"?? Please quote the relevant peer reviewed literature please.
True. Should we treat depression with Prozac?? Bipolar disorder with Lithium?? Schizophrenia with antipsychotics?? If so why is this different from treating ADHD with stimulants?? None of the psychiatric disorders has a definitive objective test to make the diagnosis. Does this mean that you think that it is not appropriate to treat any psychiatric disorders with medication??
Are you also the last to suggest that people holding an MD do not have Godlike powers of discernment to tell apriori and ex cathedra, just who those people who have psychiatric diagnoses would be, and should be treated with psychopharmacologic agents??
Paul This is a whole other topic for discussion but I agree with your libertarian approach.
Paul
"Angel" anonym...@none.net
uh, have you checked out the DSM ? I believe it is in its fourth edition.
Very definitive. Very objective.
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
Paul P...@xhawaii.rr.com
Uh, yes.
I believe it is in its fourth Correct.
If you think that DSM IV has *very objective* tests to make diagnoses then perhaps we are reading a different diagnostic manual. In any case ADHD (which is the topic of discussion here) is ALSO in the DSM IV and seems to me to be equally "objective" in terms of defining the criteria for diagnosis as are depression, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia.
If you read the criteria for making diagnoses for various psychiatric illnesses in DSM IV you will find that they are subjective and open to individual interpretation. They also largely rely on the patient's perception of his/her symptoms which by definition is subjective.
Paul
"Angel" anonym...@none.net
God help you if you ever actually need mental health ***istance. You won't be able to accept it because you don't want to acknowledge an entire science.
And you will suffer because of your arrogance.
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
"Steve Harris" SBHarris...@ix.netcom.com
test
--
Steve Harris You can email me at sbharris...@ix.netcom.com But remove the numerals in the address first.
============================== Our nada who art in Nada Nada be thy nada..
-- Dada Hemingway ========================== ...
Carey Gregory nos...@gw-dash-tech.com
He didn't reject an entire science, nor was he arrogant. He stated that the DSM's diagnostic criteria rely largely on the patient's own reporting and are inherently subjective. He's quite right, and no honest psychologist/psychiatrist would disagree.
Paul p...@xhawaii.rr.com
Is it a pattern in your life to distort the comments and intentions of others??
If you disagree with my comments you could discuss it without making gratuitous insults. Perhaps you are unable to rebut my comments and your reply is a reflection of this fact.
I encourage you to seek out mental health ***istance if this is a recurrent problem for you. Good luck.
In any case it is my belief that although psychiatric diagnoses are largely based upon subjective criteria, that this is all we have at the moment and I am in favor of clinicians using their good judgment in determining the appropriateness of using pharmacotherapy on their patients. And I would include ADHD as one illness in which the clinician can use his/her good judgment, given the lack of objective criteria, in determining who would be a good candidate for pharmacotherapy.
Paul
| To Top |