Have We Been Thinking About A.D.H.D. All Wrong?
Even as prescriptions rise to a record high, some experts have begun to question our assumptions about the condition — and how to treat it.
Supported by
In the early 1990s, James Swanson was working as a research psychologist at the University of California, Irvine, where he specialized in the study of attention disorders. It was a touchy time for the field. The Church of Scientology had organized a nationwide protest campaign against the psychiatric profession, and Ritalin, then the leading medication prescribed to children diagnosed with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, was one of its main targets. Whenever Swanson and his colleagues gathered for a scientific conference, they were met by chanting protesters waving signs and airplanes overhead pulling banners that read, 'Psychs, Stop Drugging Our Kids.'
It was true that prescription rates for Ritalin were on the rise. The number of American children diagnosed with A.D.H.D. more than doubled in the early 1990s, from fewer than a million patients in 1990 to more than two million in 1993, almost two-thirds of whom were prescribed Ritalin. To Swanson, at the time, that increase seemed entirely appropriate. Those two million children represented about 3 percent of the nation's child population, and 3 percent was the rate that he and many other scientists believed was an accurate measure of A.D.H.D. among children.
Still, you didn't have to be a Scientologist to acknowledge that there were some legitimate questions about A.D.H.D. Despite Ritalin's rapid growth, no one knew exactly how the medication worked or whether it really was the best way to treat children's attention issues. Anecdotally, doctors and parents would observe that when many children began taking stimulant medications like Ritalin, their behavior would improve almost overnight, but no one had measured in a careful, large-scale scientific study how common that positive response was or, for that matter, what the effects were on a child of taking Ritalin over the long term. And so Swanson and a team of researchers, with funding from the National Institute of Mental Health, began a vast, multisite randomized controlled trial comparing stimulant treatment for A.D.H.D. with nonpharmaceutical approaches like parent training and behavioral coaching.
Swanson was in charge of the site in Orange County, Calif. He recruited and selected about 100 children with A.D.H.D. symptoms, all from 7 to 9 years old. They were divided into treatment groups — some were given regular doses of Ritalin, some were given high-quality behavioral training, some were given a combination and the remainder, a comparison group, were left alone to figure out their own treatment. The same thing happened at five other sites across the continent. Known as the Multimodal Treatment of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder Study, or M.T.A., it was one of the largest studies ever undertaken of the long-term effects of any psychiatric medication.
'We have a clinical definition of A.D.H.D. that is increasingly unanchored from what we're finding in our science.'
Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Axios
an hour ago
- Axios
Former, current CDC employees call on RFK Jr. to resign
Current and former employees of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention are calling on Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to resign, warning that job cuts and proposed funding reductions will hurt the agency's ability to protect the public from future health outbreaks. Why it matters: The Atlanta-based CDC has long been the unbiased hub Americans turn to for facts about health topics, including sexually transmitted infections, maternal and infant health and respiratory infections. Driving the news: Carrying a large American flag, dozens of current employees at the facility walked out in protest of the cuts and joined people rallying in support of the department. Tuesday's protest attracted more than 100 people who packed the sidewalk along Clifton Road across from the CDC's headquarters. What they're saying: Sarah Boim, a member of Fired But Fighting, a grassroots group of former CDC employees who were terminated this year, told Axios the organization holds rallies each Tuesday in support of people who still work at the agency. "It's really hard to put into words how horrible this experience has been, not just for us, but it's going to really affect everybody in America," she said. Eric Mintz, another former CDC employee, told Axios proposed cuts to the CDC, National Institutes for Health, Food and Drug Administration and Medicaid will take away resources needed to protect people from illnesses. "It's not waste, it's not abuse, it's not fraud," Mintz said. "It's hard-working people with expertise trying to protect the American citizens." Catch up quick: The Health and Human Services Department in March announced about 2,400 positions would be eliminated from the CDC. HHS has said reducing its workforce from 82,000 to 62,000 full-time employees will cut costs from the agency's nearly $2 trillion budget. On Monday, RFK. Jr. removed all 17 members from the expert panel that makes vaccine policy recommendations to the CDC. He said in a statement the agency is "prioritizing the restoration of public trust above any specific pro- or anti-vaccine agenda." Questions are still being raised on who runs the CDC, as there is no public health official or designated point person leading the agency. State of play: Trump's fiscal year 2026 budget also recommends cutting $3.59 billion from the CDC. The budget, which was approved by the U.S. House, is still lingering in the U.S. Senate. Threat level: Anna Yousaf, an infectious diseases doctor at the CDC's National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, called Kennedy a "domestic health threat" who has dismantled programs ranging from lead poisoning prevention to maternal and infant health monitoring.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
SpaceX readies private launch of four astronauts to International Space Station
Four crew members are set to launch Wednesday on a privately funded mission to the International Space Station. The flight, organized by the Houston-based company Axiom Space, is slated to lift off at 8 a.m. ET from NASA's Kennedy Space Center in Florida. The foursome will journey into orbit in a SpaceX Crew Dragon capsule atop a Falcon 9 rocket. NASA will broadcast live coverage of the launch beginning at 7:05 a.m. ET on NASA+. The flight was scheduled to launch Tuesday but high winds along the Florida coast forced a one-day delay. The mission, known as Ax-4, is expected to last about two weeks at the International Space Station. The mission will be led by retired NASA astronaut Peggy Whitson, who has already logged a record 675 days in space — more than any other American astronaut. Joining her will be pilot Shubhanshu Shukla, an astronaut with the Indian Space Research Organization; mission specialist Sławosz Uznański-Wiśniewski, a Polish scientist with the European Space Agency; and mission specialist Tibor Kapu, a mechanical engineer from Hungary. Shukla, Uznański-Wiśniewski and Kapu will make history by becoming the first people from their countries to live and work on the International Space Station. During their two-week stay at the orbiting lab, the Ax-4 crew members will conduct a host of scientific experiments, according to NASA, including studies of muscle regeneration, how sprouts and edible microalgae grow in microgravity and how tiny aquatic organisms survive at the ISS. If the launch goes according to plan, the four astronauts will dock at the space station on Thursday at around 12:30 p.m. ET. The upcoming flight will be Axiom Space's fourth crewed mission to the International Space Station. The company's first private expedition to the ISS was in 2022 with an all-civilian crew. The price tag for the Ax-4 mission has not been publicly disclosed, but space tourists reportedly paid around $55 million per seat on previous Axiom Space expeditions. This article was originally published on
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Opinion: Chronic Absenteeism Is a Vital Sign for Kids' Health. New Framework Seeks a Cure
When we worked in clinics caring for families and children, we routinely measured vital signs like blood pressure and heart rate and growth metrics like height and weight. But one of the most important health indicators remained out of reach: whether the kids were regularly showing up in school. School attendance is critical for success in the classroom, and success in school is core to health across a lifespan. Children who attend school regularly are far more likely to achieve academically and graduate from high school than those who are chronically absent. In turn, high school graduation leads to better health outcomes, and students who graduate are more likely to have fewer chronic illnesses and fewer injuries, and live longer lives, than those who do not. Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter Yet today, more than 1 in 4 American students is chronically absent, defined as missing more than 10% of school days. In some districts, that proportion is closer to 1 in 2. The COVID pandemic widened and deepened a longstanding problem, and now, the obstacles that prevent children from coming to school — chronic illness, disengagement in the classroom and unmet social needs — are wide-ranging. While many teachers and principals have worked tirelessly to get students back into the classroom, chronic absence has become a problem too big for educators or schools to solve alone. Related A new public health framework, developed by education and public health experts at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Kaiser Permanente and Attendance Works, offers a comprehensive, community-driven approach with three core elements: data, partnerships and prevention. First, school attendance data should be tracked and analyzed on a regular basis by district-level teams of educators, epidemiologists and clinicians who can interpret patterns and target solutions. Key questions include: When during the academic year does attendance dip? At what age does it start to falter? Which neighborhoods are most affected? Public health departments can include chronic absence in their community health needs assessments. Sharing school attendance data securely with health providers can help identify children with particular conditions, like asthma, who are missing school and require extra attention. In the District of Columbia, for example, pediatricians — with the consent of parents — receive regular reports about which children in their practices are on track to become chronically absent. They then can talk to families about what's happening. If children are missing school for health reasons, more intensive medical treatment may be needed. If the problem is disengagement in the classroom, clinicians can help assess whether there are additional educational needs. If there are social factors, such as inadequate child care or housing, clinicians can work with social workers in schools or community services to find resources to assist families. Related Data alone is not enough; partnerships are essential. Beyond health care providers, community organizations, afterschool programs and religious institutions all have a role to play in supporting families in areas with low attendance rates. Such broad coalitions have a track record of success. For example, the Cincinnati All Children Thrive Learning Network is a citywide collaborative anchored by the Cincinnati Children's Hospital and the public school system. The collaboration reviews education and health data and uses it to inform targeted action in the clinic and classroom; for example promoting access to primary care. The results include increased improved third-grade reading scores and reduced pediatric hospitalizations. The third pillar is prevention. It can be easy to see troubling attendance patterns as simply an issue with a truant student, a problem family or a bad school. But punitive approaches are less likely to work than efforts that listen to parents, address their needs and anticipate future challenges. Using data and evidence to guide action, coalitions can take such steps as providing safer transportation routes to school by improving sidewalk safety, creating protected bike lanes, installing flashing lights on crosswalks and offering better public transportation options; adding services to afterschool programs; and expanding school-based mental health support. Communities can also set a widespread expectation that all kids must go to school every day. Encouraging the development of such norms is difficult, but doing so was at the core of other successful public health strategies, like smoking cessation and traffic safety. Related Not every approach will succeed. To sustain progress, it is important to document, evaluate and share what works and why. Research-practice partnerships such as the Catamount Community Schools Collaborative build long-term collaborations among researchers, health practitioners and representatives from districts and state agencies to quickly assess the implementation and results of innovative programs. In San Francisco, youth are trained as researchers to help in such efforts. Most fundamentally, this framework's approach to chronic absence means keeping focus on a measurable outcome and innovating with solutions until every child has the best chance of success, both in and out of the classroom. Like heart rate and blood pressure, school attendance is a vital sign for health. Like weight and height, it is fundamental to child development. Now is the time to prioritize reducing chronic absence to support the long-term health of children.
