I am thinking of a different theory for ADH(d)

On July 23, 2016, we discontinued our forums. We ask our members to please join us in our new community site, The Hartmann Report. Please note that you will have to register a new account on The Hartmann Report.

2 posts / 0 new

I am Dx'd as ADHD. My 14 year old son is dx'd as ADHD.

I want to offer an alternative explanation to Thom's Hunter theory. I see the ADH mindset as one that is about rapid adaptation. Some books will look at the condition of ADHD as partially a temporal dysfunction. The ADHD individual is always in "the moment." There is little mental effort put into concerns about future consequences. At a minimum, due to a lack of ability to focus on certain tasks, the thoughts of future consequences are thought of and forgotten in very quick bursts.

I have taught two different children how to play chess. The process of learning is encapsulated well within the game of chess. It involves a broad array of skills and abilities. It involves big ideas of strategy, and smaller ideas of individual tactics. To practice the game you need to learn small skills. But you can't just win with the small skills. You have to include both the big ideas and the small ideas in the game.

My son learned chess in a way that is typical of the ADHD mind. He didn't sit down and focus for long periods of time. In a nutshell, he learned a lot of individual tactics, played a lot of fast games of chess, and eventually through that process he was able to rise to an acceptable level of success at the game for his own tastes. This was a very rapid process where he went from being 40th in the state tournament (not all that awesome), to being 4th in state in the span of a year. It wasn't an anomaly, because he placed in the same position the following year.

The key here, however, is that he basically took the tools that were immediately at hand and adadpted them rapidly to suit his needs. He does things in unconventional ways when he plays chess.

My daughter, on the other hand, learns it in a much different way. She takes a longer time to master the ideas of the tactics. Instead, she is more prone to learning the game by studying, memorizing, and taking time to think through her work. She has had to be told to speed up the thought process by playing quicker games.

So part of my idea here is that more rapid adaptation may be beneficial in some cases, because it specifically removes the distant future as a threat to the current solution. ADHD minds are frequently the types who will kludge things together out of nearby materials, and the specter of planning is often distasteful. I'm sure that this frame of mind exists in other people, but one of the things I notice about the ADHD individual is that he or she may be more inclined to wait until closer to the moment of action. I think this has to do with the fact that the ADHD mind needs to deal with the situation as it currently is, as opposed to the situation as we would like it to be, or as it was at the outset of "planning."

My son and I have very similar behavior patterns. This could be related to nature or nurture. Most likely, as all things tend to be, it is somewhere in between those with a smidge of each.

I thought I'd put that out there for consideration. I think Thom's idea is reasonable, but I wonder if it wouldn't be more beneficial to an indivdual if an individual has a rapidly adapting brain that requires constant distraction in order to accurately assess the current situation. I wonder what we would discover about those who truly exhibit the hallmarks of ADHD if we were to test adaptability to unknown situations.

I think this would help to explain how students with ADHD are somehow able to survive at a sustainable level in academic situations.

Additionally, the idea of the rapid adapting brain would explain the apparently paradoxical affect of stimulates on the ADHD individual. I don't entirely agree with THom's advocacy against stimulant medication. It is extremly beneficial for me. It doesn't appear to be more physically addictive than something like coffee. I can take days off the medication and the most I feel is a certain excitability and less organized thoughts if I don't take it. One time, I heard Thom refer to someone on stimulant meds as a "speed freak." Well, Thom would not recognize my behavior on meds as being that of a speed freak.

One of the reasons I came to this idea is that I was trying to understand what my brain was doing with the stimulants. It's very clear that it is a stimulant on the rest of my body, but my brain seems to immediately do battle with the medication. It occurred to me that it is the attempt of the brain to adapt to the stimulant. It really feels as if my brain is trying its hardest to shut down the overstimulation by suppressing it neurally. It's an interesting paradox, because I have long had the problem of not being able to sleep to do the distractability of the environment. This was the case long before I ever took medication. So the strange part is that I take an amphetamine, and I can lay down and my brain seems like it's ready to sleep, but my body won't let me. Our brain gives us offsetting cues in other cases, so this is not an unfounded notion. If you think about things like the aftermotion effect that is associated with waterfalls (waterfall effect), you'll see my point. The specific neural functions that lead to this are not necessary to understand. Basically, your brain gives you an opposite motion sensation in what appears to be an attempt to bring the newly encountered moving environment into a managable and steady state. Your brain offsets the downward motion so that stationary items appear to be moving upwards.

I have to learn things from scripts from time to time. Rather than memorize a script like many of my coworkers have done, I am best when I learn the material, and essentially recreate the same content as the script by taking the teaching material as the set of tools, and adapting it to the situation. In that way, this is like the example with chess.

Another way to think about it is to consider that question of a change in one's environment. Is an individual more likely to be the active party in changing the environment to suit her needs, or is an individual more likely to be the one adapting oneself to suit the current state of affairs? I would suggest that the ADHD individual may be more inclined towards adapting to suit the environment.

Experiments might include testing the rate of adaption to things like motion, and then comparing those averages to dx'd ADHD patients who exhibit particularly high levels of ADHD behaviors. Perhaps a mild stimulant comparison between previously unmedicated, but dx'd ADHD patients and undx'd ADHD patients.

Just thought I'd put that out there for ADHD people to chew on.

May. 18, 2011 8:15 am


I would say that your ideas may be valid, but you also have to understand that ADD manifests in males and females differently. Females tend to be more introspective, more of the dreamer type, where as males tend to be more physically active. Also, statistically people who have ADD or have undiagnosed ADD tend to be more likely to drop out of school. There has been much more research done on how ADD effects males versus females, and many of the differences in the individual manifestations are now coming to light. I myself am also ADD, and I have hypersensitivity to all things around me. I get sensory overload quite a lot, and shut down within myself as opposed to becoming more manic in my behavior. I withdrawl, I don't like to be touched, and I become vicious towards any outside stimuli. http://psychcentral.com/blog/archives/2010/02/18/what-do-girls-with-adhd-look-like-as-adults/ <This is blog post regarding the differences, and how women are in a comparison to men as they grow older in dealing with the issue.

I have both thought of ADD as perhaps an evolutionary step like yourself, or a holdover from hunter/gather humans as well. I can see both sides because ADD helps me at times, but also hinders me in other avenues. Being more aware of the "now" in our surroundings as opposed to thinking of the future may have helped us in hunting situations, as well as defensive situations. Being in the now may have made us more aware of our surroundings which would have been a large part of survival for our species. On the other hand, ADD could be a step in evolutionary design in that people like us are able to hyperfocus on certain things (such as chess), and process them in ways that don't make sense to "normal" people but are considerably more in the realm of higher thinking that others cannot conceptualize. We also have to take into account that as our society has changed it has in essence become more "ADD" as well. There are constant outside stimuli that we are bombarded with on a daily basis that most people seem to be able to ignore which also seems to make them less aware of what is going on around them. I, personally, am always well aware of what is going on around me. I don't feel comfortable unless I am able to observe the behaviors, body language, and mannerisms of other people I am interacting with however inadverant as that interaction may be. I think that it is important to point out that I notice things well before other people I am with do, if they even notice them at all. So that behavior could be either evolutionary or primal.

I do agree that once most who have ADD (whom I have known) are able to get over the shock of whatever intial stimuli around them that they tend to adapt more easily to situations. Also, I went my entire childhood being undiagnosed but knowing that there was something different with me going on in my head than everyone elses. I did well in school, very well in fact, when I could be bothered to attend. I would get constantly frustrated with the school work because to me it was too easy, and I would get frustrated with those around me because they didn't "get it" like I did. I would ask for harder school work constantly, and sometimes I was obliged and sometimes not...at the times when I was I did much better and went to class.

When I was finally diagnosed, when I finally got help, I was reluctant to take anything. I thought I could manage it by myself (because it had worked soooooo well my entire life). I finally conceeded and have been medicated for only a few months. The first day I took my prescription it was like a light went on. I was able to focus, my emotions were much more even keel, and I was able to get things done. So now, though I still live inside my own head (what a crazy place it is to be), I am able to sleep ON the stimulant...without it I never was. I have had sleeping issues my entire life, and I changed my diet, exercised, meditated, didn't drink caffine, and did whatever I could to help myself...no dice. I do think that there are many people out there who abuse the medication, who shouldn't be on it in the first place, but as for myself and it seems yourself as well, we need it. Thom is wrong in that we are "speed freaks." I think for people who TRULY have this horrible, dangerous, gift it calms us so that we are able to function properly. I also, do not have an addictive personality and I can go without it and not fiend for it. Would be interesting to see how others feel able this...

Kellylynn's picture
Apr. 10, 2012 2:06 pm

Trump - Dumb Luck or A Master Manipulator?

Thom plus logo Either it's an act of a master manipulator, or he has the best luck there is. Donald Trump wanted the Fed to lower interest rates, knowing that that would provide a solid and multi-year boost to the economy. But when Trump came into office, rates were already low and the Fed was not inclined to help.
Powered by Pressflow, an open source content management system