Is it just as simple as big pharma looking for more addicts?

It's definitely Big Pharma looking for new customers.

And the fact that the prescription meth has euphoric, habit-forming and positive side effects for the patients (weight loss, decrease need for sleep, increased cognitive productivity, etc).

The push to start recognizing Adult ADHD start about two decades ago.

The problem is that diagnosis is completely based on self-reported symptoms, checklists, etc.

The only break is that there is supposed to be documented evidence of ADHD symptoms prior to age 12. But you can imagine how extensive that fact-finding mission is and how closely it is adhered to.

Adult ADHD is also completely linear. You get the diagnosis, then you get prescription meth.

There's no alternatives explored. No non-drug therapy, other than perhaps students and employees asking for accommodations or disability claimants adding it to their file.

There are other non-meth drugs that in theory help with ADHD like atomoxetine and bupropion.

But surprise, surprise. When offered to Adult ADHD sufferers, they will to the last man come back reporting that they weren't effective.

There's also the aspect of diagnostic creep. The diagnosis is essentially made when a prescriber relents and prescribes a trial of meth.

But once given the label, it becomes part of the patient's identity and entitlement. There is essentially no way passed that point that someone can be "undiagnosed" or proven that they don't have it.

Lastly, it's a condition where essentially the patient always comes to the clinician predetermined that they suffer from Adult ADHD. It's very rare that they come with undifferentiated symptoms and let the clinician reach the diagnosis alone by expert assessment without preexisting bias.

Is it just as simple as big pharma looking for more addicts?

It's definitely Big Pharma looking for new customers.

And the fact that the prescription meth has euphoric, habit-forming and positive side effects for the patients (weight loss, decrease need for sleep, increased cognitive productivity, etc).

The push to start recognizing Adult ADHD start about two decades ago.

The problem is that diagnosis is completely based on self-reported symptoms, checklists, etc.

The only break is that there is supposed to be documented evidence of ADHD symptoms prior to age 12. But you can imagine how extensive that fact-finding mission is and how closely it is adhered to.

Adult ADHD is also completely linear. You get the diagnosis, then you get prescription meth.

There's no alternatives explored. No non-drug therapy, other than perhaps students and employees asking for accommodations or disability claimants adding it to their file.

There are other non-meth drugs that in theory help with ADHD like atomoxetine and bupropion.

But surprise, surprise. When offered to Adult ADHD sufferers, they will to the last man come back reporting that they weren't effective.

There's also the aspect of diagnostic creep. The diagnosis is essentially made when a prescriber relents and prescribes a trial of meth.

But once given the label, it becomes part of the patient's identity and entitlement. There is essentially no way passed that point that someone can be "undiagnosed" or proven that they don't have it.

Lastly, it's a condition where essentially the patient always comes to the clinician predetermined that they suffer from Adult ADHD. It's very rare that they come with undifferentiated symptoms and let the clinician reach the diagnosis alone by expert assessment with preexisting bias.