New hyperactivity drug study ignites debate among doctors

[Guest guest]

I am pleased that drugs like Adderall and Concerta are finally coming underfire for their ineffectiveness and side effects. Lazy parents most often get their kids on these drugs instead of working with them, accommodating them, etc., like past generations were forced to do.

While it hurts me that these lazy parents might have stunted their children's growth by putting their children on these drugs, it pleases me that they have paid out money for years and years for drugs that essentially do not work.

They deserve to be hit in their pocketbook at the very least for their refusal to act like responsible parents.

Administrator

http://www.heraldtribune.com/article/20090327/ARTICLE/903271053/0/NEWSSITEMAP

New hyperactivity drug study ignites debate among doctors

By SHANKAR VEDANTAM The Washington Post

Published: Friday, March 27, 2009 at 1:00 a.m. Last Modified: Thursday, March 26, 2009 at 10:37 p.m.

WASHINGTON - New data from a large federal study has reignited a debate over the effectiveness of long-term drug treatment of children with hyperactivity or attention-deficit disorder, and have drawn accusations that some members of the research team have sought to play down evidence that medications do little good beyond 24 months.

The study also indicated that long-term use of the drugs can stunt children's growth.

The latest information paints a very different picture than the study's positive initial results, reported in 1999.

One principal scientist in the study, psychologist Pelham, said that the most obvious interpretation of the data is that the medications are useful in the short term but ineffective over longer periods, but his colleagues had repeatedly sought to explain away evidence that challenged the long-term usefulness of medication. When their explanations failed to hold up, they reached for new ones, Pelham said.

"The stance the group took in the first paper was so strong that the people are embarrassed to say they were wrong and we led the whole field astray," said Pelham, of the University at Buffalo.

Pelham noted that the drugs, including Adderall and Concerta, are among the medications most frequently prescribed for American children, adding, "If 5 percent of families in the country are giving a medication to their children and they don't realize it does not have long-term benefits but might have long term risks, why should they not be told?"

The disagreement has produced a range of views among the researchers about how to accurately present the results to the public. One e-mail noted that an academic review of the group's work, called the Multimodal Treatment Study of Children with ADHD (MTA), asked why the researchers were "bending over backward" to play down negative implications for drug therapy.

Jensen, one of Pelham's fellow researchers, responded that Pelham was biased against the use of drugs and was substituting his personal opinion for science.

Jensen said that Pelham was the only member of the team of researchers who took away "the silly message" that the study raised questions about the long-term utility of drugs, but interviews and the e-mails show that Pelham was not alone.

The MTA was designed to test whether children diagnosed with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, or ADHD, do better when treated with drugs, with drugs plus talk therapy, with talk therapy alone or with routine medical care alone. Children with the disorder have trouble paying attention, are restless and hyperactive and sometimes disruptive in school.

All rights reserved. This copyrighted material may not be re-published without permission. Links are encouraged.