It's a real pleasure to listen to Dr Brown!

I forget my passwords to EVERYTHING. No matter how easy it is to remember. I always think I'll remember and then blank. The questions in class one is big. Sometimes I interrupt people cause if I don't communicate it right then I'll lose it. I try so hard to be an "active listener" but it can be so hard.

There are at least a few advantages to having the lousy short terrm memory from childhood instead of later in life. One cannot miss what one has never had; and one learns coping skills at a younger age.

This is me exactly trying to listen to this but am thinking what i will be eating for dinner then i get back to listen then am thinking about tiktok video that i made earlier then get back to listen then am thinking about my boyfriend why he didn't text me yet...... oooofu so i have ADD

Boy I'm really hoping there's gonna be more "adieu". Edit : 4:42.. dang

Really outstanding content however, at the age of 50 and a lifetime sufferer of inattentive ADD, I wish there was more focus on that side of the equation. As with most things in life I believe the squeaky wheel gets the grease, and research and discussions in the realm of ADD is no different. Those of us with the inattentive form of ADD are usually pleasant amenable people, which is why the bulk of attention is given to the hyperactive side of ADD (or ADHD). The inattentive-types simply go along with most everything, seldom making waves (except inadvertently, most times caused by sheer chronic neglect). I feel like the ADD community, the unwritten feeling is: Why address something that doesn't come across (on the outside, anyway) as troublesome? Most non-ADD folks don't have a problem with those that suffer from inattentive ADD because this type of ADD usually doesn't result in conflicts. And, on those occasions when conflict does occur (between a neuro-typical and inattentive ADD'er), the neuro-typical person can usually out maneuver the inattentive ADD'er due to their superior executive function. In layman's terms - the neuro-typical person simply thinks faster on their feet - which is an enormous benefit when arguing a point - and exceedingly frustrating for the inattentive ADD'er. And you can forget about IQ; this is directly related to processing speed. Conflict or not, thinking quick on one's feet is absolutely essential when trying to persuade somebody of something. If you've ever had an inattentive ADD'er have an absolute nuclear explosion over a minor point (or even a major point), its because they rarely can express their point of view without being trampled by a neuro-typical thinker (particularly when there is a disagreement). It gets incredibly frustrating and when the tipping point is reached, the ADD'er can finally win an argument with an explosive response. It's not healthy and can be damaging to relationships, which is why many inattentive ADD'ers are not close with a lot of people. It's very difficult to have lots of relationships when you feel like you are constantly at the whim of those you are associated with. Ask an inattentive ADD'er how often they get to make the decision on what to do (especially when there is a group of people). Frustrating! Most times the neuro-typical’s will basically gang-up on the inattentive ADD'er and quickly and decisively overwhelm them. Rarely does the decision come from an inattentive-type when dealing one-on-one with a neuro-typical -- and very rarely is a decision made by an inattentive ADD'er while among a group of people. Again, frustrating! The reason I'd like to see more on the subject of inattentive ADD is we suffer in silence and the hyperactive (squeaky-wheel, ADHD'er) suffers around us, which brings us to the ultimate conclusion: The reason ADHD is handled with much more prevalence is because it affects more people. The kid or adult that has the hyperactive form of ADHD drives everybody crazy, which is why it's addressed more. On the other hand, the inattentive ADD'er keeps to themselves, causing little conflict (driving very few crazy) and, therefore, very little is done - because it doesn't impact people where they live. The little girl staring out the window versus the little boy screaming at the other children - who do you think gets addressed. My point is this: I don't begrudge the ADHD'ers, but why are they somehow deemed more worthy or relevant merely because they are more visible? Dr. Brown, you have done a great service to the world of ADD - and have indeed addressed inattentive ADD, but perhaps the score can be leveled a bit more by giving some needed focus to the less vocal group of ADD sufferers. Thank you.

I watched to the whole video and I don’t remember anything.

Just re-reading the horrific story of Richard Fee, who was told he had ADHD when he had nothing whatsoever wrong with him, was doing Adderall, and went psychotic and ended up on Adderall and Abilify and Seroquel. I am amazed it didn't kill him before he took his own life. The Adderall had him smashing plant pots up with a baseball bat, threatening to burn his parents house down, talking to the stars, threatening to run people over, talking to himself and inanimate objects. He also ended up on Clonidine and Venlaxafine. He stopped taking Adderall about four weeks before he hung himself and that probably caused side effects, perhaps it was too much in the end. This hasn't moved Tommy, he's wrote letters to the New York Times attacking them, Keith Conners and Alan Schwarz about ADHD overdiagnosis and druggings

It's not Tom Brown's schooldays but Tom Brown's drug days

Just reading a book by ADHD Guru Thomas E Brown Smart but Stuck. He describes... In this book you will meet and get to know 11 teens and adults including: • Sue, who earned high grades until middle school, then lost motivation for schoolwork and became disorganized and oppositional in 9th grade, frustrating teachers and family while losing hope for herself. • Mike, a college student who was put on academic probation. His dad always told him he’s smart but just lazy, and now he’s starting to believe it. • Steve, a computer programmer whose ADHD struggles have led to him losing his job-and his wife. He’s good at programming computers, but not at programming himself. • Sarah, who’s had trouble keeping track of things and getting work done since she hit menopause. She’s puzzled, since she never had such a hard time when she was younger. It seems they have little to nothing in common with each other. There is certainly zero evidence presented that these people have ANYTHING wrong with their brains, let alone all having the same "diagnosis!" He's pathologizing normal basically to make money for himself and his career and 101 reasons could account for their behavior. Sue again sounds like Louise my oldest kid. Sarah, who’s had trouble keeping track of things and getting work done since she hit menopause. Exactly. That is the answer

ADHD is the pathologizing of childhood, and I should add, the field of psychiatry is increasingly pathologizing normal human behavior while allowing the normalization of aberrant and pathological behavior. It is the weaponization of psychology and psychiatry and the lowering of the noble profession of medicine to a status no better than that of a snake oil salesman. The human species is not unique in that the young of the species have an exuberance of energy, rather this is a common trait shared by many thousands of species. Even an uneducated observer should be able to note this shared commonality in nature. The young of the species are usually highly active and very prone to engage in play behavior. We do not seem to find it aberrant in chimpanzees, dogs, cats, foxes, bears etc. though modern psychiatry with its slant towards the interest of the pharmaceutical industry increasingly pathologizes this behavior in human beings and emphasizes the "need" to drug the youth in order to "treat" this normal behavior. High energy levels in children is a normal finding and it should be treated as such while it is actually hypoactivity, low energy, and lethargy which is an abnormal finding. Again, this is not something that is new in the human species and in the past it was effectively dealt with by 1) having enough interspersed play time throughout the school day to allow young boys and girls to blow off the excess energy and be able to concentrate during their lessons and 2) making the lessons highly engaging to keep the attention and interests of the students. I suspect, though I do not have concrete proof, that the long-term impact of this early drugging is detrimental to the neural development of children. Regardless, it borders on child abuse to pathologize normal childhood behavior, treat it as a "mental illness," and drug a child in an effort to make them conform to un-human standards of behavior. It should also be noted that often the more brilliant and intelligent kids are restless and prone to act out if the pace of education does not suit their developmental needs. Under such conditions, rather than providing a gifted child with the proper pace and intellectual challenge they require for their academic development they are drugged and made to endure lessons which they find hopelessly boring to conform to the pace of other students. That constitutes the drugging of a child to conform to the needs of the teacher rather than actually addressing the individual child's needs.

The first official label in 1902 was “a morbid defect in moral control” (MDMC), since childlike behavior was socially viewed as a moral issue and not as a medical problem. Words like “bad” are not used to describe a child’s behavior now. Instead, terms like “maladaptive” are the more popular description of a child’s poor and impairing behavior. ADHD is best described as a subjective social construct that describes 18 undesirable-impairing-normal-childish behaviors and attempts to frame them as a disorder subjectively. Every behavior listed in the DSM-5 begins with the word “often” to ensure that even the “symptoms” (the 18 behaviors) of ADHD are subjective and based on a person’s opinion. The acceptance of ADHD by many as objective, though it is entirely subjective, works by psychiatrists propagation of a logical fallacy. The American Psychiatric Association has convinced millions that they are experts on alleged abnormalities (such as ADHD) without ever establishing a standard of normalcy. Not only is the DSM-5 construct subjective, but there is also no valid or reliable means to measure or diagnose a subjective social construct such as ADHD is. Only a person’s personal judgment based upon their observation or another’s testimony is required. When someone says that they “have ADHD,” they are merely stating that they behave in such a way that causes them or their authorities distress. ADHD equals behavior. Since ADHD is subjective and entirely fluid, it is regularly impossible to win or lose an argument about ADHD. Making matters worse, people label many children under the subcategory of ADHD entitled as “Not Otherwise Specified (NOS),” which determines that children do not even need to meet the subjective listed criteria in the DSM-5 for a diagnosis of ADHD. Children need to be misbehaving in a way that a clinician feels it impairs or distresses the child or his family. This subjectivity regularly leads to clinicians overlooking authentic objective problems that the child may have. Not all of the 18 behaviors listed as supposed symptoms of ADHD are moral in nature. Some actions, such as “often forgets things of importance,” are normal childlike (and adult-like) amoral behaviors. Others, such as “often gets out of his seat when expected to remain seated” is direct disobedience and not hyperactivity as it is listed in the DSM-5. Because ADHD is subjective, some kids who are diagnosed as having the construct are not sleeping well at night, whereas others are rebellious at heart. It is not fair, therefore, to make blanket statements about the spiritual condition of all children who have been stigmatized with the ADHD label or suggest that ADHD is just a parenting problem. In some cases, that is true, but in other cases-because ADHD is so subjective-a child could have a physical sickness that has been undiagnosed (e.g., ASD). ADHD does not describe an inability to pay attention; the construct describes a problem of misplaced or immature interest/values. The child labeled can play video games for hours at a time without losing focus. The problem is not an inability to pay attention, but rather, it is a problem of misplaced attention. Attention is naturally a reflection of a person’s values/desires. The construct of ADHD assumes that healthy children have self-control rather than needing to be taught self-control and trained by the Holy Spirit. The default position of all children is to be like a city without walls that is open to destruction. Only by learning self-control can a child be successful. Hyperactivity is another name for high energy, which exposes another subjective aspect of the syndrome: “normal” energy levels do not exist from which to suggest a standard let alone to discern alleged deviances. When a person becomes a parent, individuals view his high energy as an asset not as a determinant like when he was a child. Who doesn’t want higher levels of energy? The most successful people in professional sports, in academia, and commerce are often the most energetic. High energy is only viewed as a disorder or impairment when it disrupts an academic setting, causes distress, or hinders success. But such is the result of a lack of self-control and not a problem of high energy. Unlike the construct of ADHD, when a child has a genuine physical impairment that hinders giving attention (e.g., ASD), he does not selectively offer attention (e.g., the child labeled as ADHD can memorize lines from his favorite movies but not math formulas). In ASD, attentional problems can be observed in all aspects of life and not just those that are not of interest to the child. ADHD depends on the perspective that “normal children” inherently offer their attention to their authority in a productive way and that children naturally know how and to what to give their attention. These vital lessons are not inherent to the child, and a cursory overview of the book of Proverbs reveals that teaching a child how to pay attention correctly and to what to give his attention are priority number one for the parent/sage. Research/statistics regularly reveal that many children who are labeled and stigmatized as having ADHD struggle with dyslexia, reading comprehension, are enduring familial problems at home (e.g., divorce, neglect, and abuse), and are sometimes autistic (they have a misdiagnosis of ADHD). They act out further because they are misunderstood, hurting, stigmatized with a psychiatric label that categorizes them as abnormal, and have lost motivation thinking that no hope exists for them. If ADHD were a valid physical disease with biological markers and an objective etiology, the child could grow out of it according to the DSM-5. The construct of ADHD is listed as a “neurodevelopmental disorder” in the DSM-5, which means that children are merely developing slower than their peers. This type of child was once called a “late-bloomer,” but now late-bloomers are looked at as disordered or degenerated children. If children are late bloomers, they can and will mature with loving direction and the learning of self-control. Through repetition and maturity in desires and pursuits, a child’s brain will conform to the patterns of thinking and behaving he or an authority establishes in his life. When you view a child as normal, this process is called education. When a child is considered disordered, abnormal, or neurologically damaged, this same process is called neuroplasticity. The answer is the same. Performance enhancing drugs (psychostimulants; e.g., Ritalin and Adderall) that are framed as medicines do not fix an alleged malfunction or balance out neurochemicals. Instead, these powerfully addictive drugs attack the nervous system to produce their effects. Behavioral changes due to the impact of powerful psychostimulants do not prove that ADHD is a valid construct; The results reveal that the drug action of psychostimulants is to stimulate and thus to enhance performance. This reality is why psychostimulants are forbidden in most competitive sports. Whether labeled or not, taking psychostimulants will enhance a person’s academic and athletic performance, which is why they are one of the most widely abused prescription drugs in America and regularly referred to as “Kiddie Cocaine.” Psychostimulants regularly cause insomnia, which is known to atrophy the prefrontal lobes and cause attentional problems. Sadly, the child’s alleged problem that these drugs are marketed to correct is to heal the prefrontal lobes where ADHD is supposed to one day be found. The evidence shows, however, that a large portion of children started on psychostimulants end up addicted to the prescribed drugs’ illicit counterparts (e.g., cocaine and meth) later in life. There is also mounting evidence that keeping children on an artificial high produced by psychostimulants causes them to be diagnosed as depressed, psychotic, and manic later in life. These drugs are not healing agents but neurodegenerative drugs. One must ask why a neurodegenerative drug that blocks the healthy function of the nervous system is being given to children who allegedly have a neurodevelopmental problem. No medical degree, knowledge of biology, or classes in neuroscience are required to diagnose ADHD, as it is a matter of recognizing behavior according to the APA’s standard rather than discovering a disease. This fact exists because there is no physical cause to the construct of ADHD; “No biological marker is diagnostic for ADHD” (DSM-5, 61). Parents, school counselors, behavioral therapists, and teachers-those without medical degrees-typically diagnose ADHD within social contexts, exposing ADHD to be a social construct and not a valid biological disorder. Teachers usually diagnose ADHD according to the child’s behavior (often on a behavioral scale and according to their perspective) and regularly initiate encouraging parents to have their children checked out. What do you think to this Tommy?

Drug Pusher